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.

This should be a mandatory disclosure notice on every vaccine dose.

When minors are intentionally exposed to information about sexual preferences or practices without explicit consent of the parents, the school is engaging is sexual harassment of children. This is qualitatively no different to an intimidating male manager insisting on discussing sex with female subordinates.

Artemisinin, a widely available extract from Sweet Wormwood plant species (Artemisia annua, contains approx 0.5% by dry weight) and a WHO recommended anti-malaria medication, is also a promising antiviral with an exceptionally broad range of action. The first clinical trial (small) found it to be effective against Covid. Review of research: https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/57/3/217/htm

The ‘current thing’ therapy for the totalitarian personality disorder. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/23/style/cannibalism-tv-shows-movies-books.html

Climate Denier: noun, a person who denies the existence of naturally occurring climatic changes and believes instead that changes in weather-patterns are caused by human activity.

Socialism is mandatory, an enforced state doctrine; charity is by definition (necessarily) voluntary. Before charity is even possible we must have private property rights, something we own that we can give, and socialism does not respect private property rights. Socialism precludes charity.

Misinformation and the State

If the government were genuinely concerned about misinformation they would be here, on uncensored Telegram, rationally arguing against false beliefs and responding to objections. Their refusal to engage in public deliberation based on evidence and consistent reasoning is of itself the evidence that they are not interested in correcting misinformation but only using it as an excuse for political vilification and censorship. They are therefore in breach of Discourse Ethics (see the extensive work of Juergen Habermas and Karl Otto Apel on this point) and a sign of bad faith. Moreover, a government that pursues censorship as an end instead of public deliberation may have a strategic motive to covertly propagate disinformation and promote extremism. Our shared moral duty is not just to label a particular viewpoint as ‘extremist’ or ‘wrong’ but explain why it is objectively wrong. If I can engage in broad social discourse on a voluntary basis, as my unpaid social contribution, then there is no excuse for any politicians, the government and statutory agencies, who are well paid to engage with the community, not to do it on a full time basis. Dogmatism about values and norms is wrong, a commitment to violence as the ultimate arbiter of values and fact. https://culturalanalysisnet.wordpress.com/2017/12/24/on-what-is-right/

By coercing others to wear masks to protect you implies that your mask does not protect you, so you agree that the effectiveness of masks is very low if any. At the same time, the requirement to wear a mask exposes people to psychological and bacterial harm, apart from the fact that it violates the the principle of free medical consent and is utterly dehumanising.