COVID-19 vaccines and the fine art of doublethink

8 February 2021

In 1948, perennial dissident Eric Blair wrote Nineteen Eighty-Four under the pen-name George Orwell.

Blair, whose life experiences had sharpened his innate distaste for authoritarianism in any form, intended his novel to be both a warning to future generations of what life would be like under a hierarchical, tyrannical world government, and a diagnostic manual for recognising the signs and symptoms that such a system was in the process of being established.

It’s always a sign of the zeitgeist when a phrase becomes memified, so here it is:

• 

• 

• 

• 

One of the central pillars supporting the dystopian world of Ninety Eight-Four is doublethink.

Doublethink is essentially a method of indoctrination which allows one to hold two contradictory opinions at the same time without noticing the contradiction.

It is distinct from hypocrisy, in that the hypocrite claims to have moral standards or beliefs to which their behaviour does not conform, or engages in a behaviour or activity for which they criticise others.

Doublethink, on the other hand, is

“To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself – that was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink.”

Nineteen eighty-four

The post-truth COVID-1984 era that we’re living in provides countless examples of doublethink in action, but the justifications given for population-wide rollout of the experimental biologic agents incorrectly labelled as “COVID-19 vaccines” are the supreme exemplar.

The reason, we are told, that virtually everyone must receive these of these fast-tracked products, which have not even completed Phase 3 trials to establish safety and efficacy, is that they will allow us to reach herd immunity, otherwise known as community immunity.

Herd immunity is a concept first articulated by A.W. Hedrich in the 1930s, based on observations of cycles of measles epidemics.

Hedrich concluded that when more than 55% of children under the age of 15 years old had become immune to measles via contracting and surviving the infection, measles epidemics ceased in that area. Outbreaks recommenced when enough children were born, and/or non-immune children entered the community, to drop the percentage of children who were immune to the measles virus below the critical threshold.

The herd effect occurs when an infectious agent (virus or bacteria) is unable to find enough susceptible individuals to infect, replicate itself within, and spread to others. Because the herd effect decreases the circulation of a disease-causing agent in the community, it confers some measure of protection on those who have not become immune to the infectious agent.

However, for the herd effect to occur, individuals must become truly immune to the infectious agent – that is, they must a) not become infected when exposed to it and b) be unable to pass it to others. This is known as sterilising immunity.

None of the experimental products currently being promoted as “COVID-19 vaccines” has been shown to provide sterilising immunity and hence, there are no grounds for asserting that widespread uptake will result in herd immunity.

Pfizer-BioNTech “COVID-19 vaccine”

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla has publicly acknowledged that his company did not assess whether participants in their “COVID-19 vaccine” trial were able to spread SARS-CoV-2 after receiving the product.

When directly asked whether their product prevented transmission, Bourla perfunctorily replied:

“I think that’s something that needs to be examined. We’re not certain about that right now.”

Pfizer CEO admits he is ‘not certain’ their COVID-19 shot will prevent vaccinated people from spreading the virus

Apparently Bourla feels no compunction for Pfizer to carry out this vital examination themselves, despite having received millions in government funding for development of their product, which stands to rack up US$14 billion in sales in 2021 alone.

Oxford-AstraZeneca “COVID-19 vaccine”

When six rhesus macaque monkeys were injected with the “COVID-19 vaccine” developed by the University of Oxford and pharma behemoth AztraZeneca, and then deliberately exposed to SARS-CoV-2, the virus infected the upper airways of all six monkeys, and

“no difference in viral load in nose swabs was found on any days between vaccinated and control animals.”

ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination prevents SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in rhesus macaques

In other words, the Oxford-AstraZeneca product failed to produce sterilising immunity.

The study that has been trumpeted as showing that this product substantially reduces transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in humans, did nothing of the sort.

The authors of the study – as yet not peer reviewed – that journalists seized upon to make this false claim clearly state that “transmission studies per se were not included in the analysis”.

Instead, participants in the UK arm of the trial were given nose and throat swabs to self-administer on a weekly basis, and RT-PCR tests were carried out to detect SARS-CoV-2.

Inadvertent dosing errors occurred during the trial, causing some participants to receive two standard doses of the experimental product, while others were injected with a half dose followed by the standard dose.

Among those who received two standard doses, the authors state that “there was no evidence of protection” from so-called asymptomatic infection – that is, testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 without exhibiting symptoms – while those who received the half dose followed by standard dose were 49.2% less likely to test positive without exhibiting symptoms of infection.

The study authors ventured, somewhat gingerly, that their results “indicat[e] the potential for a reduction of transmission with a regimen of two SDs [standard doses]” of the Oxford-AstraZeneca products.

Hardly a solid basis for the enthusiastic cheerleading of the mainstream media, nor for the Australian government’s determination to ensure that virtually the entire population receives this experimental product, which will not complete its Phase 3 trial until late February 2023.

The Swiss government has already rejected the Oxford-AstraZeneca product due to numerous protocol variations and errors, stating that

“The data available and evaluated to date are not yet sufficient for approval.”

SwissMedic

The vaccine advisory bodies of Germany, France and Sweden vaccine have recommended that the product only be administered to people aged 18-64, due to a lack of data on its efficacy in older people – the population segment that our government will be targeting first.

World Health Organization Chief Scientist, Dr Soumya Swaminathan has stated that

“At the moment, I don’t believe we have the evidence on any of the vaccines to be confident that it’s going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on.”

Dr Soumya Swaminathan

The Therapeutic Goods Administration, in granting provisional approval to the Pfizer-BioNTech “COVID-19 vaccine”, explicitly acknowledged that “it is not yet known whether it prevents transmission or asymptomatic disease.”

Doublethink in action

Let’s return to Orwell’s definition of doublethink: the ability to simultaneously accept two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct.

It requires an impressive capacity for doublethink to aver, as has US COVID-19 Task Force chief Dr Anthony Fauci, that high uptake of “COVID-19 vaccines” will achieve herd immunity while also acknowledging that nobody knows whether these products prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

A similar degree of doublethink is required for a coalition of pharma-funded organisations and institutions to urge the Federal government to crack down on social media ‘misinformation’ (i.e. any sharing of information, much of it from world-renowned scientists and physicians) that threatens their sponsors’ profit margins, while they themselves purvey misinformation – for example, Coronavax head Associate Professor Chris Blyth has claimed that “we will need to vaccinate the population to build immunity and prevent outbreaks” and that “a COVID-19 vaccine would restore our freedom and way of life”, in the absence of any evidence supporting such claims.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison flaunted his capacity for doublethink when he insisted that “we want as many Australians vaccinated as quickly as possible” in order to support economic recovery, while also warning that economically devastating international border restrictions will remain in place for at least the next year.

But it takes a truly stupendous capacity for doublethink to dismiss the rapidly mounting number of deaths occurring hours to days after receiving “COVID-19 vaccines” as coincidences attributable to the recipients’ advanced age, comorbidities, or just bad luck, while at the same time attributing every death occurring in a person who has tested positive to SARS-CoV-2 (using a PCR test that is completely unfit for purpose as a diagnostic test), or is even suspected to have been infected, as a “COVID-19 death”, regardless of the age or health status of the deceased person, or indeed whether they had any signs of infection.

The role of doublethink in totalitarianism

In Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell makes it clear that the people of Oceania – both the controlling elites of the Party and the everyday folk – learn and practise doublethink in order to fit in, gain status within the Party, and avoid social disapproval and disciplinary action.

Doublethink is a method of thought control. To even recognise contradictions within the Party line is to commit a thoughtcrime. The people of Oceania zealously guard themselves against thoughtcrime using a technique known as crimestop – “protective stupidity”, as chief enemy of the State Emmanuel Goldstein describes it – for fear of the type of torture meted out to Winston Smith in the Ministry of Love (whose name is, in itself, a stellar example of doublethink).

It takes willingness to exercise one’s critical thinking capacity, and a stiff shot of moral courage, to fight your way out of the invisible spiderweb of doublethink when all around you seem to be enmeshed in it.

But, like the young child in the tale of the Emperor’s New Clothes, once you do, you not only free yourself but others around you to acknowledge and speak the truth.

And only when your mind is freed from cognitive traps such as doublethink are you capable of taking in facts, processing them into meaningful and coherent information, and making intelligent decisions on the basis of that information.

The decisions you make about your health and medical care – including whether or not to accept a “COVID-19 vaccine” – are among the most important choices you will ever make.

Perhaps you might like to read, or re-read, Nineteen Eighty-Four before you make this momentous decision. It may help you recognise the multitudinous instances of doublethink, Newspeak, unpersoning, memory holing and other dystopian phenomena that have beset our society, resulting in mass cognitive disablement and the encroachment of the biosecurity state: tyranny on a scale that the despots of Orwell’s era could only dream of.

When the state, either directly or by using corporations as its proxies, can override your bodily autonomy by manipulating, coercing or outright forcing you to accept a medical treatment, that state owns your body, and you are a slave:

Only those whose minds are free and who exercise and defend their right to bodily autonomy, can truly call themselves free people.

If you are overweight or have a chronic disease that puts you at increased risk of serious illness from viral infection, NOW is the time to take action on it! Obesity, type 2 diabetes, hypertension and coronary artery disease are preventable and largely reversible with a wholefood plant-based diet and Lifestyle Medicine. Apply for a Roadmap to Optimal Health Consultation today; online, phone and in-person appointments are available.