patrick.net

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/12/29/postcard-from-japan-where-the-population-still-lives-in-mortal-fear-of-catching-covid/

We are witnessing mass psychosis. I don’t really want to get into a debate about mass formation vs. mass psychosis vs. “this is deliberate” vs. “people are just going what they have to do to survive” vs. “elites don’t get full strength shots.”

We have all witnessed the process I have described above thousands of times over the last two years. And I think we should call it what it is — madness. We are dealing with people who are completely mad.

I don’t know what we do about this but I think it’s important to be clear that:

This is not a misunderstanding.

It’s not a difference of opinion.

The injectors are experiencing mass psychosis.

We live in a society in which millions of people have developed state-sponsored psychosis over the last three years. It is very very very strange.

BOMBSHELL docs reveal Covid-19 COVER-UP goes straight to the top | Redacted with Clayton Morris

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERvURcpg3JE

BOMBSHELL docs reveal Covid-19 COVER-UP goes straight to the top | Redacted with Clayton Morris

U.S. — A dispute regarding the nature of vaccination has arisen among faithful followers of The Science, and of Fauci its prophet. According to sources, some progressives say that the sacrament of vaccination is the literal body of Fauci, while others believe it is only symbolic.

"The mRNA juice we inject into our bodies to cover our COVID becomes the literal body of our Blessed Lord Fauci through a process called tranvaxstantiation," said progressive scholar Banz Tinkleman (he/him). "Whether it be Pfizer or Moderna, we can have faith that the real presence of Fauci is within the vax itself. To suggest otherwise is a damnable heresy. Why we..."

Tinkleman was unable to finish his sentence, as the left side of his face suddenly stopped working.

Several progressives, however, take issue with this view. "We vaccinate as a communal time of remembrance of Fauci and everything he's done for us," said a scholar Yix Mixley (she/her), who holds the opposing view. "We acknowledge that the spiritual presence of Fauci, blessings upon him, may be in with and under the vax, but reject tranvaxstantiation wholeheartedly."

Mixley then collapsed due to heart inflammation.

At publishing time, progressive leaders agreed to settle it through a holy war in which any heretics would be burned at the stake, but ultimately elected to just burn Portland down instead.

This story is an imaginary conversation with a missionary of Pandemism. I wanted to write an article about the formal research into the fear of contagion and the sense of disgust in humans and how “disgustology” became an integral part of the terroristic COVID fearmongering campaign. (It is really quite fascinating. For example, researchers of “disgustology” found that they could influence people’s reactions and opinions toward general concern, rule following, and anger at the non-compliant—not limited to the context of infection—by merely showing them images of ugly diseases or even by exposing them to a foul odor during the session.) A proper article about “disgustology” is on the way but here is a little Pandemism sermon demonstrating the technique.

Why is it that so few of the general public still don’t smell a rat? By that I mean why do so few people realise, as Neil Oliver realised over a year ago, that we are stuck in an abusive relationship with our treasonous, lying politicians who act as puppets to their globalist overlords, e.g. Bill Gates and the WHO, Klaus Schwab and the WEF, Mark Carney and the UN and the rest of the unaccountable globalist Big Money/Big Tech cabal who are intent on coercing us into a dystopian future of (Fuellmich Crimes Against Humanity testimonies) digitally-enforced serfdom, UBI-controlled penury and WEF-inspired transhumanism? These people are waging undeclared war on us. Have we the will to repel them?

The "Facts Don't Care About Your Feelings" Mantra Is Hurting, Not Helping

I believe the political right's marriage to being the embodiment of "facts don't care about your feelings" has become more of a detriment than a benefit for their political objectives.

We've heard since we were children that it's not what you say but how you say it. Why is this the case? Because how you persuade people to care about your cause or consider your ideas is relevant to how you communicate them.

People are more willing to consider a bad idea in a calm & convincing tone than a great idea screamed at the top of their lungs. How you choose to communicate your ideas matters because it takes into consideration the feelings of the people who are being spoken to.

The largest problem I see with the political right is their encouraged neglect of engaging in convincing rhetoric and much of it is fueled by an anti-politically correct movement that associates mindfulness of feelings as being "left" instead of essential for persuasion.

Too often both sides play the game of doing the opposite of what the other is doing even if it's detrimental to their cause. The willful decision to downgrade the importance of emotions is why the right is terrible at combating counter-narratives that are emotionally driven.

However, the rare times when the right has leaned on the emotions of a topic, it's worked in their favor. For example, Glenn Youngkin partly won Virginia because he appealed to the emotions of parents who were concerned about their children's education & protecting them.

Youngkin didn't whip out a PowerPoint and calculator to prove how the schools are failing them and walk off the stage. He spoke to the emotional concerns of the voters, especially mothers, and he was rewarded in the end.

Facts don't care about your feelings is supposed to be a mantra that appeals to truth over fleeting emotions but we're not robots. We all have emotions & to some degree emotionally driven. Some of us tend to be more analytical but find the right topic & even they can be triggered.

Humans don't connect with stat sheets the same way they connect with experiences, stories, or real situations. The left waits for an event to occur to set forth agendas but some on the right think presenting numbers is enough to persuade people to take on your cause. It isn't.

The more you believe that facts don't care about your feelings, the more blinded you'll be about how feelings don't give a damn about your facts either.

Facts and feelings aren't supposed to be mutually exclusive, they're supposed to work in conjunction to persuade.

Politics is sales and the objective is to sell why someone should consider your political proposals & vote for your candidates or party. The right has been habitually behaving like the car salesman who only tells you about the price of the car & not the experience of driving it.

There are a plethora of emotional arguments you can make that support the right-wing perspective. For example, caring about the southern border to me is about not wanting the flourishing of human & sex trafficking well before the fiscal ramifications of unchecked immigration.

Right now it seems like the Republican strategy is to wait for the Democrats to mess up so badly that people will consider the alternative. However, that's a strategy for them to come over but not stay and their advocacy will be just as fleeting as the emotions they're fearful of.

If conservatives want to win hearts and minds, they have to actually care about appealing to the heart as well and not just the mind.

Otherwise, you'll continue to appear cold and distant to the apolitical and especially the youth.

Why do so few of the general public smell a rat?

Sadly, I sense I’m still not getting through, I assume because many people still can’t believe that our politicians could be so nefariously abusive, mendacious and evil. So here I go again, this time with a somewhat different approach, to try to persuade as many people as I can that they are being appallingly abused by gaslighting.