The very nature of being social is coming together as a physical group. The concept of "social distancing" is thus one of the most Orwellian Doublethink terms I have ever seen. It's right up there with "peacekeeper missile".
Social distancing, to my mind, is even more distasteful than the term "social media," in which no one has physical proximity, and thus cannot be "social" in any normal sense of the word.
While I find the term "herd immunity" disgustingly distasteful when referring to human beings, I nevertheless can't help but see the inherent contradiction of promoting group shared immunity while forcing people to avoid groups. More of that wonderful Doublethink.
For those dwindling few who still have not read George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, the Google oracle defines Doublethink as "the acceptance of or mental capacity to accept contrary opinions or beliefs at the same time, especially as a result of political indoctrination." If the current Fauci Flu Plandemic isn't a glaring example of this phenomenon, then none can be found.
Even as recently as when I was parenting, the practice of putting all the kids in a room with one who had chicken pox or mumps was a common practice. The children would thus exchange the viruses and develop life-long immunity to those relatively common childhood maladies. This was also done with influenza and other seasonal discomforts.
Many people are under the mistaken belief that the practice of immunology began with the creation of the polio vaccine by Jonas Salk, in the 1950s. The concept of inoculation has a long and storied history using some distasteful methods to our modern minds, but effective nevertheless.
The practice of inoculation, or variolation as it is referred to now, came to the attention of the Anglosphere in the 1800s, when British doctors brought the practice back from India, and added it to Edward Jenner's own work in this area.
Inoculation involved rubbing the pus from smallpox sores into pin pricks in the skin of healthy people to generate antibodies to the disease. Louis Pasteur had the bright idea of using a relatively harmless virus called cowpox to achieve the same result. To Westerners, the concept is just 200 years old, but in India, the practice had been used for at least a millennium, and not just for smallpox.
The idea of "herd immunity," or what I prefer to call "community immunity," is an ancient idea. One imagines the practice evolving out of animal husbandry and inoculating one's farm animals by placing them all in the same barn and letting Darwinism run its course.
What was new to the 19th century was the idea of microbes being the cause of disease. Humans intuitively understood that proximity spread disease, but thanks to Aristotle, could not conceive of an unseen creature jumping person to person. It wasn't until Zacharias Janssen developed the microscope in the 16th century that humans could conceive of anything smaller than the width of a hair.
Janssen's fellow Dutchman Antonie van Leeuwenhoek ran with the microscope's new revelations and created the entire science of microbiology. He was the first to posit that these tiny creatures were the culprits in spreading disease, and not the mythical unbalanced humours that required bleeding out patients. It seemed logical, he thought, that inoculating healthy people with the pus of sick people was in fact using these tiny creatures against themselves.
The idea of quarantining sick people is far older. The use of leper colonies dates back thousands of years, and was also used for a number of diseases in both farm animals and humans. Isolating the sick is probaably one of the oldest forms of medical practices and seems almost intuitive or instinctual.
All this being said, the idea of isolating the entire population of the planet to fight what amounts to a severe cold or flu was developed in AD2020. Never in the history of humanity has anyone thought to quarantine every single human being on Earth in order to fight a disease. In fact, the very idea flies in the face of common sense - though certainly no one ever accused the political classes of possessing such innate reasoning capabilities.
First off, someone needs to produce the necessities that maintain both the sick and the well in society - an idea that seems to have escaped the Powers That Were.
Furthermore, having those individuals who aren't sick roaming around would seem to spread whatever immunity they naturally possess, even if that immunity is little more than good fortune. After all, they are apparently doing something right and should be emulated, insofar as they don't later become ill themselves. Either way, it's a learning experience for all of us.
The very idea of global social and economic shutdown as a means to fight an illness is itself the most vile example of Doublethink ever devised. The whole concept places the entire human race at risk of starvation and economic ruin in order to prevent some small fraction of humanity from getting sick.
Even more absurd is the notion that isolating those who have survived the virus, thus depriving the rest of us from sharing their immunity.
Immune systems develop and harden through contact with the outer world. We pick up viruses and bacteria by the millions in just an average day, rubbing them into our eyes, sinuses and mouths with completely automatic motions. It's almost as if our deeper minds are trying to ingest as many pathogens as possible for target practice.
Those of us who still consume the Geezer Media are literally being conditioned to deny our common sense and thousands of years of human experience. We are being told that vaccines are cures, which they most definitely are not. We are being told that we must wait in isolation for community immunity to kick in, which defies logic. We are being flooded with insane ideas that we know are wrong, but that we must believe at the point of a gun.
Classic Doublethink.
When what we instinctively know to be true is contradicted by the politically motivated messaging of our supposed authorities, it is our sacred duty - both to ourselves and our species - to ignore those edicts en masse and get back to the business of living.
We are each given a finite time in this life and we are literally being robbed of it by actors who are self-serving liars. We know that in our hearts, but we must elevate that knowledge to our conscious minds and take action based on it.
If one prefers to live in fear and huddle in one's cave until madness or starvation takes the only real possession we have, then so be it. But to inflict fear on others in order to rob them of their lives is a crime so heinous, so despicable, so egregious that to not fight back is itself a crime - one of acquiescence to evil.
Doublethink is a cognitive virus that has infected us all at some level. Like any other virus, we must isolate it and mobilize antibodies against it.
The real threat to our health is in our minds, not our bodies.
Here Thar Be Monsters!
From the other side of the argument to the other side of the planet, read in over 149 countries and 17 languages. We bring you news and opinion with an IndoTex® flavor. Be sure to check out the Home Site. Send thoughts and comments to bernard atradiofarside.com, and tell all your friends. Note comments on this site are moderated to remove spam. Sampai jumpa, y'all.
Showing posts with label double think. Show all posts
Showing posts with label double think. Show all posts
22.2.17
Pretzel Logic
I came across a video that does a fine job of placing left-wing absurdity on display. It places the insanity of identity politics in stark relief, especially in the hallowed halls of academia.
For instance, rockets are sexist because the aerodynamic shape resembles a phallus. Noted, but as far as I can see, the shuttle was vulva shaped, but required three phalli to get it off the ground. A vulva-shaped craft that could launch and land without a phallus would probably be welcomed by the space industry, as it would likely save quite a bit of money and effort.
Recently, the "University" of Washington-Tacoma declared that grammar itself was "racist" and "sexist". How they arrived at that conclusion is a complete mystery, though they claim that the grammatical "hierarchies" lead to biased language structure. I suppose they had to overlook "it" and "one" as gender-neutral pronouns, or that "black and white" and "color" as adjectives for printing and photography obviously place non-white in higher regard, hierarchically speaking. Perhaps they are referring to the standard order of adjectives in the English language: Quantity or number, Quality or opinion, Size, Age, Shape, Color, Proper adjective (often nationality, other place of origin, or material), Purpose or qualifier.
The only thing I can figure is that Size and Shape coming so high up the list makes this grammatical convention sexist, while Color coming so far down the list and in close proximity to Proper adjectives makes it racist. In any case, I am flummoxed by the claim, since this is a common convention, but does not preclude a little mix and match.
Regardless of all the histrionics on the part of the left, there are only two sexes, represented by the X and Y chromosomes within our genetic structure. Gender, on the other hand, is nothing more than grammatical constructs representing the natural dichotomy. How do they plan to attack German, which assigns nouns one of three genders (seemingly at random), which is integral to the language's structure and affects all sorts of other things in the grammar? Perhaps they intend to eliminate the masculine and feminine, and use only the neuter? While this would greatly simplify the language, it would also make it incomprehensible to most German speakers.
Even more tortured is the leftist logic that science can be racist, sexist or nationalist. By this logic, the molecular structure of water must be racist and sexist because it was first proposed (in primitive form) by Empedocles in 450 BC, a white European male. Disregarding the fact that two hydrogens and one oxygen have been shown to be the structure of water throughout the Universe, our fundamental concept of this molecule must be skewed by racial, sexual and ethnic bias.
Forget that Neil DeGrasse Tyson promotes "white" science, or that male and female skeletons display objectively quantifiable differences, this is all a racist, sexist plot to dominate the world!
Forget that Sickle Cell Anemia statistically affects more blacks, or that Fanconi Anemia C statistically affects more Ashkenasi Jews, or that by definition you must have a uterus to contract uterine cancer, its all a racist, sexist plot!
While the basic impulse is correct - everyone should be treated equally according to their skills and talents - identity politics is conceived and implemented solely for divisive purposes. As George Carlin so lucidly put it, "they" want to keep us fighting with each other while "they" run to the bank with our money. It is so perfectly Machiavellian that even a most cursory read of The Prince would highlight the technique.
"Divide and conquer" is one of the oldest and most fundamental of military strategies, right up there with "Fish in a Barrel" strategy, that it is amazing how many people have fallen for it. One has to tip the hat,though, to the brilliant addition of Orwellian "Double Think," wherein the lefties have convinced themselves that dividing everyone into smaller and smaller groups constantly fighting each other is called "Diversity" and is praised and honored among the loftiest aspirations of humanity.
The left has got itself so twisted into 'pretzel logic that it has literally become a parody of itself. It seeks truth by declaring there is no truth. It declares solidarity in diversity. It employs war to establish peace. It espouses genderlessness by recognizing dozens of genders. It decries racism by employing it. Honestly, don't these people recognize their own glaring inconsistencies?
I had to laugh. An article yesterday said that independent cinemas in the US would show the brilliant film 1984, on April 4th, as a protest against Donald Trump. Do they think they are making a comment about Trump's administration, or are they pining for a world that could have been in an alternate reality. I don't think even they can clearly answer that.
Another article declared that a website allows leftists to live in an alternate reality. Frankly, I hardly think they need encouragement.
For instance, rockets are sexist because the aerodynamic shape resembles a phallus. Noted, but as far as I can see, the shuttle was vulva shaped, but required three phalli to get it off the ground. A vulva-shaped craft that could launch and land without a phallus would probably be welcomed by the space industry, as it would likely save quite a bit of money and effort.
Recently, the "University" of Washington-Tacoma declared that grammar itself was "racist" and "sexist". How they arrived at that conclusion is a complete mystery, though they claim that the grammatical "hierarchies" lead to biased language structure. I suppose they had to overlook "it" and "one" as gender-neutral pronouns, or that "black and white" and "color" as adjectives for printing and photography obviously place non-white in higher regard, hierarchically speaking. Perhaps they are referring to the standard order of adjectives in the English language: Quantity or number, Quality or opinion, Size, Age, Shape, Color, Proper adjective (often nationality, other place of origin, or material), Purpose or qualifier.
The only thing I can figure is that Size and Shape coming so high up the list makes this grammatical convention sexist, while Color coming so far down the list and in close proximity to Proper adjectives makes it racist. In any case, I am flummoxed by the claim, since this is a common convention, but does not preclude a little mix and match.
Regardless of all the histrionics on the part of the left, there are only two sexes, represented by the X and Y chromosomes within our genetic structure. Gender, on the other hand, is nothing more than grammatical constructs representing the natural dichotomy. How do they plan to attack German, which assigns nouns one of three genders (seemingly at random), which is integral to the language's structure and affects all sorts of other things in the grammar? Perhaps they intend to eliminate the masculine and feminine, and use only the neuter? While this would greatly simplify the language, it would also make it incomprehensible to most German speakers.
Even more tortured is the leftist logic that science can be racist, sexist or nationalist. By this logic, the molecular structure of water must be racist and sexist because it was first proposed (in primitive form) by Empedocles in 450 BC, a white European male. Disregarding the fact that two hydrogens and one oxygen have been shown to be the structure of water throughout the Universe, our fundamental concept of this molecule must be skewed by racial, sexual and ethnic bias.
Forget that Neil DeGrasse Tyson promotes "white" science, or that male and female skeletons display objectively quantifiable differences, this is all a racist, sexist plot to dominate the world!
Forget that Sickle Cell Anemia statistically affects more blacks, or that Fanconi Anemia C statistically affects more Ashkenasi Jews, or that by definition you must have a uterus to contract uterine cancer, its all a racist, sexist plot!
While the basic impulse is correct - everyone should be treated equally according to their skills and talents - identity politics is conceived and implemented solely for divisive purposes. As George Carlin so lucidly put it, "they" want to keep us fighting with each other while "they" run to the bank with our money. It is so perfectly Machiavellian that even a most cursory read of The Prince would highlight the technique.
"Divide and conquer" is one of the oldest and most fundamental of military strategies, right up there with "Fish in a Barrel" strategy, that it is amazing how many people have fallen for it. One has to tip the hat,though, to the brilliant addition of Orwellian "Double Think," wherein the lefties have convinced themselves that dividing everyone into smaller and smaller groups constantly fighting each other is called "Diversity" and is praised and honored among the loftiest aspirations of humanity.
The left has got itself so twisted into 'pretzel logic that it has literally become a parody of itself. It seeks truth by declaring there is no truth. It declares solidarity in diversity. It employs war to establish peace. It espouses genderlessness by recognizing dozens of genders. It decries racism by employing it. Honestly, don't these people recognize their own glaring inconsistencies?
I had to laugh. An article yesterday said that independent cinemas in the US would show the brilliant film 1984, on April 4th, as a protest against Donald Trump. Do they think they are making a comment about Trump's administration, or are they pining for a world that could have been in an alternate reality. I don't think even they can clearly answer that.
Another article declared that a website allows leftists to live in an alternate reality. Frankly, I hardly think they need encouragement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

