Face masks are also psychologically damaging even to those who are not themselves wearing one. I have discussed the underlying phenomenological mechanism here: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3840787

There are killer arguments against vaccine mandates, they defeat them irrespective of contingent circumstances and utilitarian considerations. There are killer arguments against the legality of emergency powers, proving they violate the logic of the delegation of legislative authority. Why were they not used or even acknowledged by the leaders of the freedom movement?

Agreeing to wear a face mask to avoid confrontation is no different to joining the Nazi party to avoid confrontation. COLLUSION. It is even worse if you support the mandates: COMPLICITY.

The Freedom Movement, otherwise known as ‘Reignite Theocracy Now’, was foretold in 1979 by a shadowy group of British avant-gard filmmakers with propensity for DaDa. How did they know? Predictive programming? Was it a coded message from the Cabal? 😉 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmyuE0NpNgE

“SCIENCE under dictatorship becomes subordinated to the guiding philosophy of the dictatorship. Irrespective of other ideologic trappings, the guiding philosophic principle of recent dictatorships, including that of Covid-19 Emergency Powers, has been anti-human in that what has been considered "rational utility" and corresponding doctrine and planning has replaced moral, ethical and religious values. Covid-19 and environmentalist propaganda were highly effective in perverting public opinion and public conscience, in a remarkably short time.” https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm194907142410201

If your dignity has a price, sooner or later that price will be paid and your dignity gone forever.

If speaking the truth is a kind of ‘violence’, then it is good violence, a just violence, a necessary condition of meaning, whereas the inherent violence of censorship is wrong violence, an attack on all of humanity, a war on meaning.

Vaccine mandates violate the right to life, killing some healthy people for the benefit of the many.

The methods of incentivising collusion are subtle, impossible to detect by most. If there is one, core defect in human reasoning that facilitates collusion with evil, it may be the lack of discernment between a ‘necessary evil’ and the common good. An average person delegates their moral authority to experts, and this alone is a moral wrong that leads to collusion.

Why in NORMAL creating counter-propaganda Sound Bytes?

The NORMAL series of sound bytes (stickers, posters) are distilling the logical essence of various arguments and hypocrisies associated with the vaccine and mask mandates. They are used for the same reason as in advertising and street protests. Assuming that the unsolicited attention span of an average person is less than a few seconds, this is as much truth as the obedient, brainwashed population is able to absorb. For some, this will trigger some reflection, a progressive moral realisation, and those who feel that the mandates are morally wrong will be able to articulate powerful reasons to defend themselves from social coercion. This is the aim of the exercise. Also, politicians love to argue against complex arguments, because it allows for evasion and misdirection. They can’t hide from an obvious, distilled truth. Each Normal sound byte captures just one point, one moral reason. This is a powerful form of mass communication and persuasion. SYMBOLS APPEAL TO THE COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS. A deeper explanation of moral reasons is available here: https://news.1rj.ru/str/NormalParty/1064

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

― C. S. Lewis

The quote is intuitively compelling, but misses one crucial fact: moral conscience can be objectively right or wrong, and this has objective consequences for the host. When it is right, no harm is done; when it is wrong, it will destroy the host. CS Lewis implies that tyranny is objectively wrong, but asserts that this can still be ok by the subjective moral conscience of the tyrant, without giving rise to any self-destructive consequences. Objectivity implies objective consequences. Lewis’s omission leads to unwarranted pessimism.

There is only one way to refute an argument; by engaging with it and demonstrating that it is either logically incomplete or leads to contradiction and is therefore non-sense. Stating your opinion is not an argument; it is changing the subject to just talking about yourself. That’s ok, you can talk about yourself, but this is a different conversation and I need you to understand this difference so that feelings about yourself are not misinterpreted as facts about me.

So no, I am not afraid of “the vaccine”, I just don’t trust psychopaths.