It's important we discover the best way to red-pill people. Please let me know in the comments how you got red-pilled and/or how you red-pill your friends.
I was red pilled in April of 2019. So before covid. But I guess I could say I was red pilled in the 90s about vaccines because that's when I first researched them and did not vaccinate my kids. But in April of 19 our state legislature was trying to pass a change in ours states exemptions for school attendance. So we, my husband and I, lifelong Democrats went downtown. To make a long story short, we have never in our lives been treated so rudely by anyone. And it was by our 'fellow' democrats. We walked out vowing never to vote Democrat again. So, my story will not help in your quest. But I 100% agree, ask question and make them think. We need to keep talking and never keep your mouth shut if the opportunity arises. Thanks for all you do.
Short version of the brainstorm for texting wider circle of friends:
Since the new booster now available to Americans contains messenger RNA that will enter our cells and have our cells make new proteins that no human cells have ever made throughout all time, I have a trivia question for you. How many humans participated in the trial that the FDA relied upon when they authorized this booster? This answer is......0 humans. The FDA authorized the newest booster as safe and effective for injection in humans, but the study they relied on for their decision didn't actually test the vaccine on humans. Just wanted to pass that on in case it makes you go Hmmm.
Since the FDA just authorized the newest booster after reviewing 0 human safety studies, I wanted to reach out to share my concerns in a way that is respectful to you and that doesn’t take up too much of your time. Would you mind taking 5-15 minutes to give me your answers to 2 questions? After that I can feel a little more at peace with whatever health decisions you make. Thanks so much!
I feel like we’re in a situation similar to something like this: If you saw that your neighbor’s upstairs bedroom was on fire, and you could see through her downstairs window that she was just calmly watching TV, you wouldn’t hesitate to run over to warn her about the fire.
But what if she thought you were mistaken? What if she said that her caretaker (who stood to inherit $1,000,000 from her) had checked everything out before he left for the night and had said it was just some harmless smoke from a neighborhood bonfire?
You’d feel like you hadn’t done right by her until she agreed to at least physically get up and look with her own eyes at the rooms that you believe are in flames. She would humor you and check out those rooms so that you both could discover the truth together: that either there was no fire and your eyes were playing tricks on you, or that there was a fire and she needed to vacate immediately (and stop trusting her caretaker).
When it comes to the vaccines, I see fire upstairs in your house. Would you humor me and take a look at two rooms by answering the following two questions, so I can feel better assured of your safety. Alternatively, if I’m barking up the wrong tree, you can consider showing me where I’m wrong so I can relax and realize it’s just a false alarm.
Room #1: The new booster now available to Americans contains messenger RNA that will enter our cells and make new proteins that no human cells have ever made throughout all time. How many humans participated in the trial that the FDA relied upon when they authorized this booster?
A. The trial that the FDA relied on in determining if the new booster was safe enough to inject in humans was tested on…drum roll… 0 humans. Yikes! It is also alarming that many doctors can’t even tell me that the safety data is inadequate without risking having their medical license and/or board certification revoked. They have been informed there could be career-ending consequences for not echoing the official message that “Vaccines are safe and effective.”
B. Adequate studies were held on humans and the safety of the new boosters was confirmed to my satisfaction when the FDA authorized the boosters. Since you’re not aware of this and are convinced you see flames, I am providing the evidence that shows that the FDA didn’t authorize this new booster until they reviewed the study in which it was tested on _____ humans for ____ months with only ____ significant adverse events.
C. I’m not worried about this and I’d rather not have a discussion with you / share evidence about why.
Room #2: During the Pfizer trial, 12 year-old Maddie de Garay had terrible symptoms within 24 hours of her second shot. She lost the ability to walk and needs a wheelchair to this day. She lost the ability to fully nourish herself and needs a feeding tube to this day. Pfizer didn’t mention in the trial report that her damage is so severe that she needs a wheelchair and feeding tube, listing her diagnosis as “functional abdominal pain.”
To my knowledge, those trial results have not been corrected, and the FDA has not announced that it would even investigated this, which means that it can’t conclude if Pfizer’s trial results were fraudulent or not. How do you feel about this?
A. Alarmed: no logical person can conclude that the COVID vaccines are safe and effective without a satisfactory explanation from the FDA about the discrepancy of the damage Maddie incurred during the vaccine trial and what Pfizer reported. Any news sources that did not alert me to this can no longer be relied on, because they gave a free pass to Pfizer instead of raising the alarm about this.
B. This is just misinformation and has been resolved to my satisfaction. I can see why you’re so concerned since you currently believe that Maddie was harmed by the vaccine and the FDA and media are covering it up. I’ve taken a little time to help guide your research by providing the following evidence about why this is actually just a bunch of misinformation.
C. I trust the FDA, but something doesn’t seem right here. Why wouldn’t they investigate what happened to Maddie? No one is contradicting what Maddie and her mom are saying, so the FDA should either insist that the data be corrected, or give an explanation for why they won’t correct it. I don’t really have time to give you any facts that confirm this though.
I had a red pill thought while walking up a small mountain trail near my residence. I have no idea if this would work. My feeling is that it might with the right sleepwalker and the right state of mind by the awake walker.
It goes back to my direct experiences with the media lying about something. Many of my friends expressed disappointment and distrust with the way the news was manipulative and biased, at best, and the evil repository of lies at the worst. These same people also had distrust of the government, some a lot and some not so much. So the awareness of not trusting either government or media is within them And yet when it came to covid injections effectively all of these people were quick to jump onto the injection train. Some who blue it truly shocked me because of their previous stance.
Recently I watched Gabor Maté, the well known psychologist, who has described how the sickness of addiction and suicide in our society is the direct result of a society built against the basic human needs of connection and genuine purpose. Our society is built with the use of lies and psychological manipulation in order to create addiction to consumption and distrust with one’s own self and self worth. And yet Maté took the injections without a second thought. Similarly Chomsky. I was surprised and more than surprised that such strong critics of the manipulative nature of the news both walked up without a thought to be injected.
For some reason there bubbled up in my mind the possibility of using media lies as a spark to kindle, perhaps, a latent curiosity within the sleepers by engaging first with something most will have direct experience of: a news story that they knew by direct or indirect experience was a lie or a biased misdirection.
For this to work, when we begin the conversation and ask the questions, we will need to be absolutely calm and without an agenda to change the person’s mind. The questions will only work with having absolute true curiosity about his/her answers without prejudgment or expectation of an answer or of him/her changing their mind. For the person to begin moving from their amygdala brain, where thinking does not exist except in closed neurotic or even psychotic closed off logical loops, they need to feel safe enough to express without being condemned or threatened with having to change their mind in any way.
Anyway, with ‘right mind’ ask the sleeper who might be awake enough to have a smidgeon of conversation to recall when they had an experience of the news having lied or been significantly in error about something they knew about. Maybe ask them how they knew the news story was a wrong. And then ask them how can they know when other news stories are true or false.
If the person is still engaged in the conversation proceed with one of the now well established relatively uncontroversial lies such as two injections will stop covid.
Ask the person if they wonder what else about the covid pandemic may have been exaggerated or misrepresented in some way.
And how can they know what is or is not true about the situation.
Who has tried this approach? Has it been successful, moderately successful, moderately unsuccessful or a total bust?
Just a random thought exercise while walking amidst trees and wildflowers on a mountain slope in Mexico.
I have yet to find one, but what we need is an all-inclusive visual matrix tool. I used to write administrative web tools for the Army at the turn of the century and I've been thinking about this need since last year.
My personal experience - I'm surrounded by cognitive dissidence or just plain ignorant. I have not one person in my local area that I can relate to about any part of this war. Most of the people around me are busy with their day-to-day and believe its 'just another day as usual'. They have no idea we are fighting for our country, and they get aggressively defensive if you attempt to confront them with the idea that a war is going on and they too are in danger.
The hump that keeps coming up is the statements, questions, and contradictions made, all require an immediate visual reference to irrefutable proof. There is no time to pull all of this together in the moment - it needs to be preemptively prepared and you never know which detail/subject you may need to breach.
In my experience, I find this to be the real problem - we lack the single utility designed to provide all the resource needed dynamically as needed.
So, we need something that is easy on the eyes, high-level, very visual, that shows the absolute macro (individual areas of concern/corruption/etc), and can be clicked-down to the absolute micro. Each layer complete with visuals, connections, links and citations.
A tool that I've called in my head - "The Red Pillar" (pun on the pill) that we can use as a presentation tool to others, or even introduce them to and have them go nuts with it, or use as a reference engine for study and research on our own. I've been thinking and thinking about this but put nothing on paper (as an systems and db engineer I'm not much of a paper publisher), but I truly believe we need an all-inclusive tool (web-based, community-assisted?) with a clickable flowchart feel to it that connects it all together.
I'm ALL-IN on such an operation. I'm a poor, disabled ex-internet technologist with nothing but time on my hands at the moment. Count me in! ;)
I highly recommend watching "The Push" on Netflix - an experiment by amazing hypnotist Derren Brown to see if he can create a situation in which someone off the street can be led by repeated hypnotic media messages and a carefully crafted series of events and peer pressure to decide to push someone off a building to their death. (Everyone is an actor except the person off the street, and the person pushed is attached by cables so they will remain safe after the push.) He found a formula to identify which people would be susceptible to that scenario, and what series of events and messages they would need to encounter to ramp up their likelihood of setting aside their morals and doing the unconscionable.
It may help shed some light on some of the possible factors at play that cause so many who suspect that the vaccines are dangerous to stay silent, and be a conversation starter to plant the seeds to start gently red-pilling friends.
To my disappointment, I've found a direct approach doesn't work well at all. You need to be gentle, it seems that if you attack a person's views on this topic too ferociously they perceive this as an attack on them, the walls go up, they get defensive and you'll get nowhere.
I've had some limited success with people by "chipping away". I largely humour them but then chip away at the edges of things, and I'm very gentle about it, I say things to lead them to think about things rather than direct conclusions, stuff like "do you reckon that makes sense?", stuff like that.
But you can see with some people you are wasting your time. There's a sort of glazed look that often goes with it too, they get a far-away vibe as they dismiss you.
I think there'll be a segment of the population, about 10-15% who will hold on to the illusion even in the face of overwhelming evidence. I fear for these people, they will need to be dragged unwilling to the light.
There’s a marketing technique that refers to ‘pattern match’ and ‘pattern disrupt.’ Essentially, humans don’t respond well to offerings that are pattern disrupts to their existing behaviour or mindset, but they are more open to a pattern match. You can sell a new fancy kind of sugary cereal to someone who eats cereal every day, but you can’t easily sell them smashed avocado on toast.
I find most people are aware that corporate corruption exists, so it’s a pattern match for them to learn of pharma corruption, and by extension, the corrupting and incentivising of the scientific industry, and after that, the conflicts of interest in agencies. This sows immense distrust, and people can draw their own conclusions. However, telling people right off the bat that the vaccines are killing people (and that the government is in on it) is a pattern disrupt, and they won’t fathom it. Yet. But when slightly shifted views become normalised, they can handle another level.
Our governments have spent millions of taxpayer dollars on nudge units. They knew it would never work to dump their whole world view on us in one hit. It took them several months and copious resources.
We may as well learn from that taxpayer-funded exercise and nudge back. :)
Great question. I've pondered this and finished writing my answer today. Substack says my answer is too long to be a comment. So I've put it into my own Substack.
The Great Barrington Declaration countering lockdown made more sense to me, from there I found a lockdown sceptic website and that lead me down many rabbit holes. It helped that I had a background in microbiology/immunology and worked in pharma - clinical trials and drug safety. I have spoken to friends, family,colleagues and strangers but haven’t been able to red pill anyone but may have sounded crazy at times because I started to question everything I had ever believed. Even if no one has been red pilled via me I have sown seeds of doubt. The Matthias Desmet theories resonate and I think I was always non conformist even though it took covid to red pill me.
I go for quantity over success rate. I post good scientific data to discussion groups on Facebook etc and just ask what do people think. Most people won’t turn around overnight but it plants the seed in many who would never even see anything outside the media narrative otherwise. Also I try not to be attached to “winning” the discussion because then people can feel you have an agenda. I keep the mentality that if they deny data it’s their problem not mine - that gets them thinking rather than fighting you.
well I am sorry for my absurdly long post. In retrospect.
It distills down to
my redpill experience is not relevant as prior to covid
Trying to redpill folks
1 - a statistic PhD person where i tried to just swamp with every source possible. Although I stuck to establishment medicine and pro 'old school' vaccine sources and provable facts it was a dismal failure.
2 - 3 folks red pilled. All extended family and primed to disbelieve the narrative. Calm discussion and provable facts was sufficient.
3 - 2 close friends. One is a rationalist and data guy. And has seen what I think are vaccine injuries point blank, ie eg his daughter stroke within 24 hours first moderna shot, And much more. So you would think primed to hear some stuff. I went at him pretty hard, did not work. It may be working on him, not sure yet. Other friend popped just at idea that there might be effective early treatment. Have written him off.
My impressions are complimentary to others, head on brute force does not work. Even when you stick to provable this or that, peer reviewed. Just dont bludgeon folk.
Allowing a conversation to develop with low key assertions of true things you know will blow their minds (it ALL blows their minds) has promise. Just drop it if they do.
Always stick to true things. Pick the minimum thing (how we code covid deaths is an excellent one) and avoid the most mind blowing (spike protein is pathogenic is why long covid and vaxx damage look similar). An excellent talking point is asymptomatic transmission is it true? Never was before eg flu stay home if sick.
Stuff that would be handy for us plebs is a set of references organized around obvious lies we wish to rebut, eg Yeadon's 12 lies you have been told. With references vetted eg by Kirsch Rose et al. I have quite a few sources ready to go but am also quite technical with a strong science background. Others could use an organized 'how to rebut x y z' help section pinned.
And this thread will be impossible to 'compile'. Maybe that was not the intent. A survey asking quite specific questions and quite a few of them might be better?
The little folk need to push alongside Kirsch et al. This is as we know of first importance. Organic bottom up reprogramming may be as important as top down Kirsch et al splashy pushes.
My thanks to our host for the opportunity.
EDIT my God it was still long. We need a survey. Still cant be compiled.
I am delighted this thread was started. Maybe our host could pin it?
One thing though, in order to make it truly useful perhaps it needs a little more structure? While I find just reading through the posts very interesting, very interesting, some are very long and while they contain nuggets they would not be easy to synthesize into 'rules of engagement'. Which might be useful. Or not.
How I was redpilled is not really relevant. It was prior to covid so while I spend a month or two trying to discern what was going on it was early 2020 and I already had the 'bones' of the situation clear. Vaccination as 'the answer' was a clear tactic.
My attempts to red-pill have been mostly failures.
Trying 'head-on' with my daughter who is pursuing a PhD in statistics was a clear failure. I presented everything at once, in a detailed documents and sources. I also provided links to McCullough Yeadon Bhadi Hodkinson plus others, and links to proof the deaths were gamed, asymptomatic transmission was unlikely and much else. I DID stick to the vaccines and absolutely and carefully avoided WEF AND avoided referencing anyone who was not provably coming from 'establishment' medicine and was prior to covid a proponent of 'old school' vaccines.
3 successes were already set up to win. Cynical extended family members. In all cases a calm discussion with lots of fact and references was sufficient.
2 good friends. Partial? One got very upset when I pointed out there was effective early treatment. "But that would mean the authorities are lying and that cant be true so you are cherrypicking AND insane'. Second is a fellow who rightly considers himself a data guy and rationalist. He watched his daughter have a stroke within 24 hours of first moderna shot. He tells me of leaking hearts, a hunter friend who dropped dead of an 'aortic dissection' and much else. I pushed too hard I believe though.
So it seems the issue is two-fold
1 we all know so many things the debate gets away and pretty soon the 'other side' is swamped. Since they only look CBC or CNN or whatever, and we know whatever they know, PLUS all we know which they do not, they are at a severe disadvantage and it becomes apparent quickly. This is unbalanced and leads to anger.
2 While the 'ratchet to truth' is only one way the bar is incredibly high. It is hard to find anything you can (provably) say which does not lead to the following chain in their minds "well if that were true then the authorities are lying, and while I can believe they are moderately corrupt and probably incompetent, they are certainly not malignant . And anyways so many would have to be 'in on it'... therefore Grant is misled and cherry picking poor guy, as what he says clearly CANNOT be true'. In other words almost anything you say makes their worldview tremble and shudder. So its a big no. They (us that is) are cherrypicking. They are misled. Their 'sources' are the minority. I am not qualified to judge, but the MAJORITY of experts says they are wrong. etc.
So just calmly disputing whatever comes up in conversation, that you DID NOT initiate seems best. Just reply with some facts and drop it.
For which we need facts. I have sources all over my computer. Fine. But there are certain questions it would be nice to have a set of agreed refutations to the current narrative. Some example questions where a repository of good answers could be made available.
How do we know asymptomatic transmission is not contributory to pandemic dynamics?
How do we know deaths counts were 'inflated' by accounting tricks?
Where is the proof that the trials were truncated by giving the placebo group the vaxx?
Etc etc. Mike Yeadons list of 12 lies you were told is a fair structure. I am trying to organize my sources but involving folks like J Rose et al in a review of sources for obvious talking points would vastly improve its usability for us plebs. Keep a pinned list of resources and current best understanding linked to obvious lies of the narrative would be SO handy.
And maybe pin this or retry with more structure to allow compilation. I tried to be brief but look what happened. Compile that! ha ha. And yet helping each other do our bit in our own direct worlds is probably more important than the sum of the efforts by Kirsch et al. If it is not organic I fear we will lose. So reference lists tied to obvious pandemic lies, and a compilation of what seems to work would be a good start.
I thank our host for pursuing this. Red-pill for the win! Get anyone over the hurdle it IS a one way ratchet. So there is that.
One red pill method that I think Steve has neglected to his detriment is the whole bribery issue. Namely, how federal grant money for schools required masks and how the CARES Act and maybe other programs paid (and still pay) hospitals to diagnose COVID, do a lot of damaging and scary procedures and even kill COVID patients for money.
These issues may have been mentioned briefly on this substack at times, but I think that most of the public don't know about these money incentives. I think that if people did know about these incentives, it would immediately make the claims being made much more suspect. For example, on the Del Bigtree's Highwire (unfortunately, I can't remember which episode), a mask opponent said that she would see or hear about people crying, begging, and testifying as to their children's suffering from masks and bringing in medical data to school board members, and the members would just sit there, looking at the parents stone-faced. This advocate said that at that time she had not known about the requirement of mask wearing attached to federal grant money, but once she found out, it all made sense. The board members wanted the money, so no scientific argument or heartfelt appeal was going to make a difference. Once awareness of the money connection kicks in, it changes the dynamic of the debate.
I believe that this whole aspect of the issue will make a lot of difference to a lot of people who don't understand or like statistics or science, but do understand human behavior and motivations. I think that it would be helpful for Steve to put together a whole post about the many ways the government and big pharma has been bribing agencies, hospitals, medical boards (? )the media etc. (for example, I think I heard a while ago that Bill Gates was funding "training" for facebook fact checkers regarding issues he is involved in.)
People may generally know that there is corruption in the world, but they have to hear the specifics of the current corrupt incentives to let go of their strong and long-held beliefs that many of our government and quasi governmental insitutions (MSM, medical associations and journals) wouldn't stab us in the back like this, either because they care about us too much or because they would be afraid of the consequences of doing so.
first the jabbed need to detox: that's priority number 1. chlorine dioxyde see dr andreas kalcker on odysee.com for more info
I was red pilled in April of 2019. So before covid. But I guess I could say I was red pilled in the 90s about vaccines because that's when I first researched them and did not vaccinate my kids. But in April of 19 our state legislature was trying to pass a change in ours states exemptions for school attendance. So we, my husband and I, lifelong Democrats went downtown. To make a long story short, we have never in our lives been treated so rudely by anyone. And it was by our 'fellow' democrats. We walked out vowing never to vote Democrat again. So, my story will not help in your quest. But I 100% agree, ask question and make them think. We need to keep talking and never keep your mouth shut if the opportunity arises. Thanks for all you do.
Short version of the brainstorm for texting wider circle of friends:
Since the new booster now available to Americans contains messenger RNA that will enter our cells and have our cells make new proteins that no human cells have ever made throughout all time, I have a trivia question for you. How many humans participated in the trial that the FDA relied upon when they authorized this booster? This answer is......0 humans. The FDA authorized the newest booster as safe and effective for injection in humans, but the study they relied on for their decision didn't actually test the vaccine on humans. Just wanted to pass that on in case it makes you go Hmmm.
Here's another brainstorm:
Hi {Friend/Family member},
Since the FDA just authorized the newest booster after reviewing 0 human safety studies, I wanted to reach out to share my concerns in a way that is respectful to you and that doesn’t take up too much of your time. Would you mind taking 5-15 minutes to give me your answers to 2 questions? After that I can feel a little more at peace with whatever health decisions you make. Thanks so much!
I feel like we’re in a situation similar to something like this: If you saw that your neighbor’s upstairs bedroom was on fire, and you could see through her downstairs window that she was just calmly watching TV, you wouldn’t hesitate to run over to warn her about the fire.
But what if she thought you were mistaken? What if she said that her caretaker (who stood to inherit $1,000,000 from her) had checked everything out before he left for the night and had said it was just some harmless smoke from a neighborhood bonfire?
You’d feel like you hadn’t done right by her until she agreed to at least physically get up and look with her own eyes at the rooms that you believe are in flames. She would humor you and check out those rooms so that you both could discover the truth together: that either there was no fire and your eyes were playing tricks on you, or that there was a fire and she needed to vacate immediately (and stop trusting her caretaker).
When it comes to the vaccines, I see fire upstairs in your house. Would you humor me and take a look at two rooms by answering the following two questions, so I can feel better assured of your safety. Alternatively, if I’m barking up the wrong tree, you can consider showing me where I’m wrong so I can relax and realize it’s just a false alarm.
Room #1: The new booster now available to Americans contains messenger RNA that will enter our cells and make new proteins that no human cells have ever made throughout all time. How many humans participated in the trial that the FDA relied upon when they authorized this booster?
A. The trial that the FDA relied on in determining if the new booster was safe enough to inject in humans was tested on…drum roll… 0 humans. Yikes! It is also alarming that many doctors can’t even tell me that the safety data is inadequate without risking having their medical license and/or board certification revoked. They have been informed there could be career-ending consequences for not echoing the official message that “Vaccines are safe and effective.”
B. Adequate studies were held on humans and the safety of the new boosters was confirmed to my satisfaction when the FDA authorized the boosters. Since you’re not aware of this and are convinced you see flames, I am providing the evidence that shows that the FDA didn’t authorize this new booster until they reviewed the study in which it was tested on _____ humans for ____ months with only ____ significant adverse events.
C. I’m not worried about this and I’d rather not have a discussion with you / share evidence about why.
Room #2: During the Pfizer trial, 12 year-old Maddie de Garay had terrible symptoms within 24 hours of her second shot. She lost the ability to walk and needs a wheelchair to this day. She lost the ability to fully nourish herself and needs a feeding tube to this day. Pfizer didn’t mention in the trial report that her damage is so severe that she needs a wheelchair and feeding tube, listing her diagnosis as “functional abdominal pain.”
To my knowledge, those trial results have not been corrected, and the FDA has not announced that it would even investigated this, which means that it can’t conclude if Pfizer’s trial results were fraudulent or not. How do you feel about this?
A. Alarmed: no logical person can conclude that the COVID vaccines are safe and effective without a satisfactory explanation from the FDA about the discrepancy of the damage Maddie incurred during the vaccine trial and what Pfizer reported. Any news sources that did not alert me to this can no longer be relied on, because they gave a free pass to Pfizer instead of raising the alarm about this.
B. This is just misinformation and has been resolved to my satisfaction. I can see why you’re so concerned since you currently believe that Maddie was harmed by the vaccine and the FDA and media are covering it up. I’ve taken a little time to help guide your research by providing the following evidence about why this is actually just a bunch of misinformation.
C. I trust the FDA, but something doesn’t seem right here. Why wouldn’t they investigate what happened to Maddie? No one is contradicting what Maddie and her mom are saying, so the FDA should either insist that the data be corrected, or give an explanation for why they won’t correct it. I don’t really have time to give you any facts that confirm this though.
D. Other:
Thanks for checking out these two rooms with me!
I had a red pill thought while walking up a small mountain trail near my residence. I have no idea if this would work. My feeling is that it might with the right sleepwalker and the right state of mind by the awake walker.
It goes back to my direct experiences with the media lying about something. Many of my friends expressed disappointment and distrust with the way the news was manipulative and biased, at best, and the evil repository of lies at the worst. These same people also had distrust of the government, some a lot and some not so much. So the awareness of not trusting either government or media is within them And yet when it came to covid injections effectively all of these people were quick to jump onto the injection train. Some who blue it truly shocked me because of their previous stance.
Recently I watched Gabor Maté, the well known psychologist, who has described how the sickness of addiction and suicide in our society is the direct result of a society built against the basic human needs of connection and genuine purpose. Our society is built with the use of lies and psychological manipulation in order to create addiction to consumption and distrust with one’s own self and self worth. And yet Maté took the injections without a second thought. Similarly Chomsky. I was surprised and more than surprised that such strong critics of the manipulative nature of the news both walked up without a thought to be injected.
For some reason there bubbled up in my mind the possibility of using media lies as a spark to kindle, perhaps, a latent curiosity within the sleepers by engaging first with something most will have direct experience of: a news story that they knew by direct or indirect experience was a lie or a biased misdirection.
For this to work, when we begin the conversation and ask the questions, we will need to be absolutely calm and without an agenda to change the person’s mind. The questions will only work with having absolute true curiosity about his/her answers without prejudgment or expectation of an answer or of him/her changing their mind. For the person to begin moving from their amygdala brain, where thinking does not exist except in closed neurotic or even psychotic closed off logical loops, they need to feel safe enough to express without being condemned or threatened with having to change their mind in any way.
Anyway, with ‘right mind’ ask the sleeper who might be awake enough to have a smidgeon of conversation to recall when they had an experience of the news having lied or been significantly in error about something they knew about. Maybe ask them how they knew the news story was a wrong. And then ask them how can they know when other news stories are true or false.
If the person is still engaged in the conversation proceed with one of the now well established relatively uncontroversial lies such as two injections will stop covid.
Ask the person if they wonder what else about the covid pandemic may have been exaggerated or misrepresented in some way.
And how can they know what is or is not true about the situation.
Who has tried this approach? Has it been successful, moderately successful, moderately unsuccessful or a total bust?
Just a random thought exercise while walking amidst trees and wildflowers on a mountain slope in Mexico.
Thank you for the forum and for reading.
@Steve Kirch
I have yet to find one, but what we need is an all-inclusive visual matrix tool. I used to write administrative web tools for the Army at the turn of the century and I've been thinking about this need since last year.
My personal experience - I'm surrounded by cognitive dissidence or just plain ignorant. I have not one person in my local area that I can relate to about any part of this war. Most of the people around me are busy with their day-to-day and believe its 'just another day as usual'. They have no idea we are fighting for our country, and they get aggressively defensive if you attempt to confront them with the idea that a war is going on and they too are in danger.
The hump that keeps coming up is the statements, questions, and contradictions made, all require an immediate visual reference to irrefutable proof. There is no time to pull all of this together in the moment - it needs to be preemptively prepared and you never know which detail/subject you may need to breach.
In my experience, I find this to be the real problem - we lack the single utility designed to provide all the resource needed dynamically as needed.
So, we need something that is easy on the eyes, high-level, very visual, that shows the absolute macro (individual areas of concern/corruption/etc), and can be clicked-down to the absolute micro. Each layer complete with visuals, connections, links and citations.
A tool that I've called in my head - "The Red Pillar" (pun on the pill) that we can use as a presentation tool to others, or even introduce them to and have them go nuts with it, or use as a reference engine for study and research on our own. I've been thinking and thinking about this but put nothing on paper (as an systems and db engineer I'm not much of a paper publisher), but I truly believe we need an all-inclusive tool (web-based, community-assisted?) with a clickable flowchart feel to it that connects it all together.
I'm ALL-IN on such an operation. I'm a poor, disabled ex-internet technologist with nothing but time on my hands at the moment. Count me in! ;)
I highly recommend watching "The Push" on Netflix - an experiment by amazing hypnotist Derren Brown to see if he can create a situation in which someone off the street can be led by repeated hypnotic media messages and a carefully crafted series of events and peer pressure to decide to push someone off a building to their death. (Everyone is an actor except the person off the street, and the person pushed is attached by cables so they will remain safe after the push.) He found a formula to identify which people would be susceptible to that scenario, and what series of events and messages they would need to encounter to ramp up their likelihood of setting aside their morals and doing the unconscionable.
It may help shed some light on some of the possible factors at play that cause so many who suspect that the vaccines are dangerous to stay silent, and be a conversation starter to plant the seeds to start gently red-pilling friends.
Here's a link to the trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doFpACkiZ2Q
To my disappointment, I've found a direct approach doesn't work well at all. You need to be gentle, it seems that if you attack a person's views on this topic too ferociously they perceive this as an attack on them, the walls go up, they get defensive and you'll get nowhere.
I've had some limited success with people by "chipping away". I largely humour them but then chip away at the edges of things, and I'm very gentle about it, I say things to lead them to think about things rather than direct conclusions, stuff like "do you reckon that makes sense?", stuff like that.
But you can see with some people you are wasting your time. There's a sort of glazed look that often goes with it too, they get a far-away vibe as they dismiss you.
I think there'll be a segment of the population, about 10-15% who will hold on to the illusion even in the face of overwhelming evidence. I fear for these people, they will need to be dragged unwilling to the light.
Hi Steve
There’s a marketing technique that refers to ‘pattern match’ and ‘pattern disrupt.’ Essentially, humans don’t respond well to offerings that are pattern disrupts to their existing behaviour or mindset, but they are more open to a pattern match. You can sell a new fancy kind of sugary cereal to someone who eats cereal every day, but you can’t easily sell them smashed avocado on toast.
I find most people are aware that corporate corruption exists, so it’s a pattern match for them to learn of pharma corruption, and by extension, the corrupting and incentivising of the scientific industry, and after that, the conflicts of interest in agencies. This sows immense distrust, and people can draw their own conclusions. However, telling people right off the bat that the vaccines are killing people (and that the government is in on it) is a pattern disrupt, and they won’t fathom it. Yet. But when slightly shifted views become normalised, they can handle another level.
Our governments have spent millions of taxpayer dollars on nudge units. They knew it would never work to dump their whole world view on us in one hit. It took them several months and copious resources.
We may as well learn from that taxpayer-funded exercise and nudge back. :)
Hello Steve.
Great question. I've pondered this and finished writing my answer today. Substack says my answer is too long to be a comment. So I've put it into my own Substack.
All the best, with peace and gratitude.
https://gduperreault.substack.com/p/thoughts-covid-reset-yogic-and-uncategorised/comments
The Great Barrington Declaration countering lockdown made more sense to me, from there I found a lockdown sceptic website and that lead me down many rabbit holes. It helped that I had a background in microbiology/immunology and worked in pharma - clinical trials and drug safety. I have spoken to friends, family,colleagues and strangers but haven’t been able to red pill anyone but may have sounded crazy at times because I started to question everything I had ever believed. Even if no one has been red pilled via me I have sown seeds of doubt. The Matthias Desmet theories resonate and I think I was always non conformist even though it took covid to red pill me.
I go for quantity over success rate. I post good scientific data to discussion groups on Facebook etc and just ask what do people think. Most people won’t turn around overnight but it plants the seed in many who would never even see anything outside the media narrative otherwise. Also I try not to be attached to “winning” the discussion because then people can feel you have an agenda. I keep the mentality that if they deny data it’s their problem not mine - that gets them thinking rather than fighting you.
I tell many I’ve had true rona x2, pumped full of vitamins, and taken the actual horse dewormer many time.
well I am sorry for my absurdly long post. In retrospect.
It distills down to
my redpill experience is not relevant as prior to covid
Trying to redpill folks
1 - a statistic PhD person where i tried to just swamp with every source possible. Although I stuck to establishment medicine and pro 'old school' vaccine sources and provable facts it was a dismal failure.
2 - 3 folks red pilled. All extended family and primed to disbelieve the narrative. Calm discussion and provable facts was sufficient.
3 - 2 close friends. One is a rationalist and data guy. And has seen what I think are vaccine injuries point blank, ie eg his daughter stroke within 24 hours first moderna shot, And much more. So you would think primed to hear some stuff. I went at him pretty hard, did not work. It may be working on him, not sure yet. Other friend popped just at idea that there might be effective early treatment. Have written him off.
My impressions are complimentary to others, head on brute force does not work. Even when you stick to provable this or that, peer reviewed. Just dont bludgeon folk.
Allowing a conversation to develop with low key assertions of true things you know will blow their minds (it ALL blows their minds) has promise. Just drop it if they do.
Always stick to true things. Pick the minimum thing (how we code covid deaths is an excellent one) and avoid the most mind blowing (spike protein is pathogenic is why long covid and vaxx damage look similar). An excellent talking point is asymptomatic transmission is it true? Never was before eg flu stay home if sick.
Stuff that would be handy for us plebs is a set of references organized around obvious lies we wish to rebut, eg Yeadon's 12 lies you have been told. With references vetted eg by Kirsch Rose et al. I have quite a few sources ready to go but am also quite technical with a strong science background. Others could use an organized 'how to rebut x y z' help section pinned.
And this thread will be impossible to 'compile'. Maybe that was not the intent. A survey asking quite specific questions and quite a few of them might be better?
The little folk need to push alongside Kirsch et al. This is as we know of first importance. Organic bottom up reprogramming may be as important as top down Kirsch et al splashy pushes.
My thanks to our host for the opportunity.
EDIT my God it was still long. We need a survey. Still cant be compiled.
I am delighted this thread was started. Maybe our host could pin it?
One thing though, in order to make it truly useful perhaps it needs a little more structure? While I find just reading through the posts very interesting, very interesting, some are very long and while they contain nuggets they would not be easy to synthesize into 'rules of engagement'. Which might be useful. Or not.
How I was redpilled is not really relevant. It was prior to covid so while I spend a month or two trying to discern what was going on it was early 2020 and I already had the 'bones' of the situation clear. Vaccination as 'the answer' was a clear tactic.
My attempts to red-pill have been mostly failures.
Trying 'head-on' with my daughter who is pursuing a PhD in statistics was a clear failure. I presented everything at once, in a detailed documents and sources. I also provided links to McCullough Yeadon Bhadi Hodkinson plus others, and links to proof the deaths were gamed, asymptomatic transmission was unlikely and much else. I DID stick to the vaccines and absolutely and carefully avoided WEF AND avoided referencing anyone who was not provably coming from 'establishment' medicine and was prior to covid a proponent of 'old school' vaccines.
3 successes were already set up to win. Cynical extended family members. In all cases a calm discussion with lots of fact and references was sufficient.
2 good friends. Partial? One got very upset when I pointed out there was effective early treatment. "But that would mean the authorities are lying and that cant be true so you are cherrypicking AND insane'. Second is a fellow who rightly considers himself a data guy and rationalist. He watched his daughter have a stroke within 24 hours of first moderna shot. He tells me of leaking hearts, a hunter friend who dropped dead of an 'aortic dissection' and much else. I pushed too hard I believe though.
So it seems the issue is two-fold
1 we all know so many things the debate gets away and pretty soon the 'other side' is swamped. Since they only look CBC or CNN or whatever, and we know whatever they know, PLUS all we know which they do not, they are at a severe disadvantage and it becomes apparent quickly. This is unbalanced and leads to anger.
2 While the 'ratchet to truth' is only one way the bar is incredibly high. It is hard to find anything you can (provably) say which does not lead to the following chain in their minds "well if that were true then the authorities are lying, and while I can believe they are moderately corrupt and probably incompetent, they are certainly not malignant . And anyways so many would have to be 'in on it'... therefore Grant is misled and cherry picking poor guy, as what he says clearly CANNOT be true'. In other words almost anything you say makes their worldview tremble and shudder. So its a big no. They (us that is) are cherrypicking. They are misled. Their 'sources' are the minority. I am not qualified to judge, but the MAJORITY of experts says they are wrong. etc.
So just calmly disputing whatever comes up in conversation, that you DID NOT initiate seems best. Just reply with some facts and drop it.
For which we need facts. I have sources all over my computer. Fine. But there are certain questions it would be nice to have a set of agreed refutations to the current narrative. Some example questions where a repository of good answers could be made available.
How do we know asymptomatic transmission is not contributory to pandemic dynamics?
How do we know deaths counts were 'inflated' by accounting tricks?
Where is the proof that the trials were truncated by giving the placebo group the vaxx?
Etc etc. Mike Yeadons list of 12 lies you were told is a fair structure. I am trying to organize my sources but involving folks like J Rose et al in a review of sources for obvious talking points would vastly improve its usability for us plebs. Keep a pinned list of resources and current best understanding linked to obvious lies of the narrative would be SO handy.
And maybe pin this or retry with more structure to allow compilation. I tried to be brief but look what happened. Compile that! ha ha. And yet helping each other do our bit in our own direct worlds is probably more important than the sum of the efforts by Kirsch et al. If it is not organic I fear we will lose. So reference lists tied to obvious pandemic lies, and a compilation of what seems to work would be a good start.
I thank our host for pursuing this. Red-pill for the win! Get anyone over the hurdle it IS a one way ratchet. So there is that.
One red pill method that I think Steve has neglected to his detriment is the whole bribery issue. Namely, how federal grant money for schools required masks and how the CARES Act and maybe other programs paid (and still pay) hospitals to diagnose COVID, do a lot of damaging and scary procedures and even kill COVID patients for money.
These issues may have been mentioned briefly on this substack at times, but I think that most of the public don't know about these money incentives. I think that if people did know about these incentives, it would immediately make the claims being made much more suspect. For example, on the Del Bigtree's Highwire (unfortunately, I can't remember which episode), a mask opponent said that she would see or hear about people crying, begging, and testifying as to their children's suffering from masks and bringing in medical data to school board members, and the members would just sit there, looking at the parents stone-faced. This advocate said that at that time she had not known about the requirement of mask wearing attached to federal grant money, but once she found out, it all made sense. The board members wanted the money, so no scientific argument or heartfelt appeal was going to make a difference. Once awareness of the money connection kicks in, it changes the dynamic of the debate.
I believe that this whole aspect of the issue will make a lot of difference to a lot of people who don't understand or like statistics or science, but do understand human behavior and motivations. I think that it would be helpful for Steve to put together a whole post about the many ways the government and big pharma has been bribing agencies, hospitals, medical boards (? )the media etc. (for example, I think I heard a while ago that Bill Gates was funding "training" for facebook fact checkers regarding issues he is involved in.)
People may generally know that there is corruption in the world, but they have to hear the specifics of the current corrupt incentives to let go of their strong and long-held beliefs that many of our government and quasi governmental insitutions (MSM, medical associations and journals) wouldn't stab us in the back like this, either because they care about us too much or because they would be afraid of the consequences of doing so.
By the way, here is an article on one school board that turned down the money due to the requirements: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/some-middletown-boe-members-decline-american-rescue-plan-funds/ar-AARm15h Maybe this is a sign that decency will start to prevail in the world. Pardon my Polyanna-ishness, but I haven't felt optimistic in a while, so I want to savor the moment.