 |
| Imagem respigada daqui |
(…) instead of restoring to people their ability to discern the true from the false, to distinguish real news from the fake news, our institutions propose once again to preserve and authoritatively intensify the linguistic alienation shored-up by entertainment and social networks. In the world truly standing on its head, disinformation appears under the guise of information and vice versa, in a “globalisation of the false” that coincides with “the falsification of the globe.” Flavio Luzi
The aim of
totalitarian education has never been to instill convictions but to destroy the
capacity to form any. Hannah Arendt
Nothing will be
the same after this, and it is not intended to be. If we don’t want the future
to look like a QR code flickering across a human face forever, we are going to
have to do something about it. Paul Kingsnorth
O título deste post foi inspirado num texto do chefe de redacção do jornal francês "La Décroissance" - Vincent Cheynet - com os seus votos para o novo ano 2022 – ver aqui. A sua posição perante algumas das medidas autoritárias e discriminatórias de mitigação da pandemia, implementadas por diversos governos europeus, é assumidamente provocatória e polémica. Começa por invocar as palavras de um amigo seu que alertava para a necessidade dos cidadãos tomarem consciência e se revoltarem contra a ditadura sanitária em curso, com o seu potencial para conduzir a uma era de controlo social radical ao estilo chinês. Cheynet considera que se vive uma distopia marcada pela propaganda, a censura e o fanatismo vacinal, com consequências sociais e psicológicas devastadoras, perante as quais as forças sindicais e os media reagem com complacência ou colaboração. O autor termina dizendo (minha tradução): “Acho que o filósofo Belhaj Kacem Mehdi tem razão quando fala da ‘primeira guerra civil mundial’. Os danos às famílias, amigos, colegas de trabalho, sociedade... serão irreparáveis para muitos. Este é o objetivo pretendido: redireccionar o ressentimento em relação ao poder para os ‘não vacinados’. A violência da sua recriminação como bodes expiatórios é bem elucidativa daquela intenção. Dois anos de narrativa do medo trazem de volta a pior fealdade moral. Querem eliminar socialmente, fisicamente, os refratários que duvidam das benesses do progresso. Os mesmos que alertaram sobre o tipo de experiências, que com forte probabilidade, estarão na origem da Covid. Neste ano de 2022 todos têm um encontro com o seu destino, ou seja, a escolha entre resistir ou colaborar.”
Por outro lado, é igualmente perturbante e preocupante que a contestação mais visível às medidas sanitárias tenha vindo de sectores conservadores, neoliberais ou até de extrema-direita, que enfatizam as restrições das liberdades individuais e criticam os efeitos negativos nos pequenos negócios (argumentos normalmente usados pela esquerda!), mas defendem um regresso a uma alegada 'normalidade' e uma reabertura da economia, sem pôr em causa o sistema económico dominante, socialmente injusto e ambientalmente insustentável. Mais perverso ainda parece-me o facto dessas pessoas usarem o argumento da defesa das liberdades individuais na contestação das medidas governamentais ou das autoridades de saúde, sabendo que não o usariam se a coerção fosse de natureza económica ou social, independentemente de ter origem em entidades privadas ou autoridades governamentais.
O papel instrumental dos media dominantes e das redes sociais na amplificação do discurso do medo (que potencia a susceptibilidade à manipulação), na disseminação das narrativas oficiais e na descredibilização ou censura das posições críticas, deve ser amplamente destacado, pois está a ser usado agora para fabricar consensos sobre o conflito na Ucrânia – de ambos os lados da barricada ideológica (tema de um próximo ‘post’). No entanto, as estratégias de manipulação de massas e de fabricação de consensos (e consentimento) tornaram-se quase omnipresentes, em particular por via da publicidade e do ‘marketing’ (comercial ou político), que recorrem ao conhecimento advindo das ciências cognitivas e das ciências sociais, sem grandes pruridos éticos. Qualquer que sejam as estratégias empregues, elas só resultam se houver conformismo, aceitação tácita ou obediência da parte das pessoas (ver sugestões de vídeos no final do ‘post’). Por isso, Huxley no livro já citado realça o papel da educação para a liberdade, da autonomia e do exercício do espírito crítico, como formas de resistência às práticas de manipulação e de desumanização orquestradas pelas elites do poder político e económico. Que tenhamos pois a lucidez, a sensatez e a coragem para atravessar os tempos sombrios que se adivinham. E que o possamos fazer apoiando-nos mutuamente. Prossigamos, pois, lado-a-lado.
EN/FR
- Paul Kingsnorth, The vaccine moment (Nov 2021):
(…) Covid-19 is a nasty illness which should be taken seriously, especially by those who are especially vulnerable to it. But it is nowhere near dangerous enough - if anything could be - to justify the creation of a global police state. As for the vaccines - well, let's just acknowledge that vaccination has become a subject which it is virtually impossible to discuss with any calmness or clarity, at least in public. As with almost every other big issue in the West today, opinion is divided along tribal lines and filtered through the foetid swamp of anti-social media, to emerge monstrous and dripping into the light. (…) Covid is a revelation. It has lain bare splits in the social fabric that were always there but could be ignored in better times. It has revealed the compliance of the legacy media and the power of Silicon Valley to curate and control the public conversation. It has confirmed the sly dishonesty of political leaders, and their ultimate obeisance to corporate power. It has shown up ‘The Science’ for the compromised ideology it is. Most of all, it has revealed the authoritarian streak that lies beneath so many people, and which always emerges in fearful times. In the last month alone I have watched media commentators calling for censorship of their political opponents, philosophy professors justifying mass internment, and human rights lobby groups remaining silent about ‘vaccine passports.’ I have watched much of the political left transition openly into the authoritarian movement it probably always was, and countless ‘liberals’ campaigning against liberty. As freedom after freedom has been taken away, I have watched intellectual after intellectual justify it all. I have been reminded of what I always knew: cleverness has no relationship to wisdom.
Continuação deste ‘post’: Part 2, Part 3
-
Daniel Hadas, The Covid Bullshit
(Mar 2022):
(…) It may then
seem flippant to speak of the Covid measures as a manifestation of bureaucratic
bullshit. Every human society has deep urges towards cruelty and
self-destruction, and those of our own have been at play in the Covid response.
Still, I believe that the terrain over which this dark river has flowed has,
inevitably, been that of our habitual landscape of process-driven, bureaucratic
faux-rationality. The Bullshit is the medium, not the message, but, as ever,
the two are inseparable. (…) compliance with even the most absurd of the rules
has largely been high. This is no surprise: we had all long ago been trained to
comply with bullshit, however we perceived it, because not doing so would be
discourteous, awkward, inconsiderate, would in short break the rules of our
passive-aggressive social contract. (…) The Covid Bullshit has not just brought
us the maddening annoyances of Zoom meetings, passenger locator forms and nasal
swabs. It has ushered in poverty, isolation and social division, death and
despair. That these consequences were brought about by soft, well-meaning power
makes them no less grave. Rather, the true lesson is just how dangerous soft,
well-meaning power can be.
- Connor Kelly, Collaboration
or resistance (Jul 2021):
(…) What we are
dealing with is a psychological defence mechanism, both personal and social,
operating on a massive scale, and being expertly weaponised by the state.
Again, it is ridiculously difficult to recognise this in oneself (it’s a self
defence mechanism!). It becomes even more difficult when it is socially
widespread. No one wants to think of themselves as being caught up in a mass
hysteria. No one wants to think of themselves as having been fooled. No one
wants to deviate so dramatically from approved opinion and be branded as a
lunatic. No one wants to think of themselves as being devoted to their self
image… (…) The quest to stand out from the ever-enlarging crowd results,
paradoxically, in mass flattening, mass imitation, maximum conformism within a
proliferation of ideological tribes.
- Ugo Bardi, The rise and fall of Scientism (Dez 2021):
(…) Lay people are
asked to express their acceptance of the new religion by participating in a
liturgy that involves jabs, face masks, social distancing, hand sanitizing, and
more. The new liturgy seems to have been remarkably successful: the faithful
are genuinely convinced that they are doing what they do as a service to
others. It is the magic of "horizontal" empathy. People like to help
others, it is a built-in behavior of the human psyche that has been hijacked by
the creators of the new religion. Scientism, as it is now, is a remarkable
success of social engineering.
- Laurent Mucchielli, L’ideologie de la vaccination intégrale n’est ni de la science ni de la médecine (Out
2021):
(…) Au bout de
quelques temps, j’ai identifié ce que j’appelle « la doxa du Covid », une
narration globale de la pandémie dont je conteste globalement le bien-fondé. Cette histoire, qui nous est racontée
depuis le début, consiste en quatre affirmations centrales : 1) un virus
horrible se répand partout sur la planète et nous risquons tous de mourir, 2)
on ne sait pas comment l’arrêter ni comment soigner les gens qui l’attrapent,
3) la seule chose à faire est, sur le modèle chinois, de confiner la totalité
de la population et de réduire au maximum les contacts entre les êtres humains,
et 4) nous ne pourrons « retrouver une vie normale » que quand nous disposerons
d’un vaccin. Le vaccin est donc présenté comme le sauveur de l’humanité depuis
le début. Et il est évidemment interdit de critiquer le sauveur de l’humanité.
Voilà toute l’affaire. (…) Finalement, dans toute cette histoire, personne ne
m’a jamais dit en substance « vous soulevez un problème grave, cela mérite une
discussion sérieuse que nous proposons d’organiser ainsi ». En réalité, il n’y
a aucun débat, il n’y a que des anathèmes que les gens se jettent à la figure.
Que cela soit la règle sur les réseaux sociaux est compréhensible à défaut
d’être acceptable. Mais que cela devienne la règle générale dans la vie
intellectuelle constitue une grave régression. (…) On voit aujourd’hui que les
géants du numérique et autres GAFAM sont avant tout des industries hautement
lucratives, qui travaillent main dans la main avec les gouvernements et avec
les principaux médias − qu’ils financent en partie −, et qui, au final,
fabriquent une sorte de pensée unique à coups d’algorithmes sélectionnant les
contenus et en « modérant » tous ceux proposés en ligne par les citoyens,
c’est-à-dire en pratiquant une censure massive de tout ce qui contrevient au
discours officiel de leurs partenaires institutionnels. (…) Si nous étions dans
une démarche rationnelle de type scientifique et médicale, la vaccination
ARN/ADN devrait être réservée aux personnes qui 1) en ont vraiment besoin,
c’est-à-dire qui ont de réels risques de faire des formes graves de Covid si
elles sont contaminées, 2) après un examen approfondi de leur état de santé
général par leur médecin traitant, afin d’évaluer la balance bénéfice/risque au
cas par cas, 3) avec leur consentement libre et éclairé − question d’éthique
médicale et de démocratie générale qui ne devrait même pas se discuter. C’est
tout le contraire de cette vaccination industrielle de masse, pratiquée de
façon quasiment aveugle sur toute la population, rendue obligatoire par un
chantage à la discrimination − si tu ne te vaccines pas, tu ne pourras plus
travailler, tu ne pourras plus aller voir un spectacle ou manger au restaurant,
tes enfants ne pourront plus aller à l’école, etc. −, doublé d’un chantage
politique − si tu ne te vaccines pas, tu es suspect d’avoir des sympathies pour
le complotisme et/ou l’extrême droite − et d’une imposture morale − si tu ne te
vaccines pas, tu menaces tes concitoyens. C’est ce que
j’appelle l’idéologie de la vaccination intégrale et je considère, en effet,
que ce n’est ni de la science ni de la médecine.
- Ole Skambraks, I cannot do it anymore (Out 2021):
(…) Instead of an open exchange of opinions, a “scientific consensus” was proclaimed, that must be defended. Anyone who doubts this and demands a multidimensional perspective on the pandemic, will reap indignation and scorn. The same pattern is at work in the newsrooms. (…) The result of one and a half years of Covid-19 is an unparalleled division in society. Public service broadcasting has played a major role in this. It is increasingly failing in its responsibility to build bridges between the camps and to promote exchange. Versão PT
- John P.A. Ioannidis, How the pandemic is changing the norms of science (Set 2021):
(…) Decisions
pronounced in the name of science have become arbitrators of life, death, and
fundamental freedoms. Everything that mattered was affected by science, by
scientists interpreting science, and by those who impose measures based on
their interpretations of science in the context of political warfare. (…) The
dominant narrative became that “we are at war.” When at war, everyone has to
follow orders. If a platoon is ordered to go right and some soldiers explore
maneuvering to the left, they are shot as deserters. Scientific skepticism had
to be shot, no questions asked. The orders were clear. (…) But “we are at war”
led to a step beyond: This is a dirty war, one without dignity. Opponents were
threatened, abused, and bullied by cancel culture campaigns in social media,
hit stories in mainstream media, and bestsellers written by zealots. Statements
were distorted, turned into straw men, and ridiculed. Wikipedia pages were
vandalized. Reputations were systematically devastated and destroyed. Many
brilliant scientists were abused and received threats during the pandemic,
intended to make them and their families miserable. (…) There was absolutely no
conspiracy or preplanning behind this hypercharged evolution. Simply, in times
of crisis, the powerful thrive and the weak become more disadvantaged. Amid
pandemic confusion, the powerful and the conflicted became more powerful and
more conflicted, while millions of disadvantaged people have died and billions suffered.
I worry that science and its norms have shared the fate of the disadvantaged.
It is a pity, because science can still help everyone. Science remains the best
thing that can happen to humans, provided it can be both tolerant and
tolerated.
- Fabio Vighi, Tyranny by Health Emergency, or the Dystopian Implosion of Contemporary Capitalism (Nov 2021):
Today’s
financially driven economy is fuelled by global emergencies, whose primary role
is to shield the system from its increasingly destructive practices. Lockdowns
and related restrictions are the latest model of social engineering. Their
immediate purpose is to allow Central Banks to carry out their astronomical
money-printing programmes, which inflate the financial sector while also – as
we are witnessing at present – causing inflation as soon as any cash is leaked
into the real economy by commercial banks. COVID-19 is, essentially, a cover-up
for systematic debt-leveraged monetary expansion. In capitalist terms, there is
no alternative to this cynical exercise – at least until the authoritarian
paradigm shift currently underway is normalised. Before it is too late, then,
we must stop believing that vaccine mandates, lockdowns, and other forms of
mass regimentation are health related. Rather, the ‘pandemic’ continues to work
as the ideological front to a mode of social reproduction that has no way of
perpetuating itself other than by imposing its despotic reshaping as necessary
and even desirable. (…) The “pandemic” was unleashed as an accelerator of
capitalist predatory violence aimed at the preservation of the financial sector
and attendant hierarchies of power. It has thrown into sharp relief how, after
a long series of ineffective neo-liberal or neo-Keynesian endeavours to
resurrect our moribund mode of production, the
extrema ratio of global emergencies (followed by lockdowns and a plan for
monetary control via digital transition) is now regarded as the only viable way
forward.
- Addison Reeves, The pandemic response as contemporary imperialism (Ago 2021):
The almost uniform
support for totalitarian lock-down measures and mandates from those on the left
has been shocking to see and has resulted in a feeling of political
homelessness for those whose leftist values are what lead them to view the
response to the pandemic with a sharp critical eye. This article shows that the
reason why so many on the left have abandoned the values of freedom of speech
and movement, bodily autonomy, and economic justice is because those people belong
to the ideology of progressivism, which exists outside the left-right
dichotomy. Progressivism is an ideology that champions limitless growth,
unbridled use of technology and the control of nature over any intrinsic sense
of worth or fulfillment.
- Panagiotis Sotiris, To Defend Public Health, We Need More Than Lockdowns (Mai 2021):
(…) There is also a future cost in lives from the lockdown restrictions, even though there will be no daily bulletins about them. Here, I refer not only to deferred medical screenings and surgical interventions but also reduced school learning and of course economic depression, unemployment, social precariousness and insecurity, and the psychological and social burden of confinement and isolation. In the end these will also cost lives. Finally, this erosion of sociality, and of course the extensive use of authoritarian measures that have also been used against forms of protest and political intervention is not something that we can accept. There is the danger of the normalization of a very authoritarian state of exception. (…) lockdown strategy operates according to the “black box” logic of the market that we find in neoliberal economics. The hope is that by reducing transmission in general we also reduce the risk for the vulnerable and the susceptible. But this is not what has happened. In a certain way, lockdowns are a “do nothing” approach to the pandemic, in the sense that by simply suspending activities and reducing mobility this will hopefully reduce mortality. (…) In contrast, a more focused approach to protecting the vulnerable and the susceptible offers a real chance of lowering mortality. This approach would require a profound reorganization of social life, both through state intervention and self-organization… (…) Most tendencies on the Left have accepted that the lockdown strategy actually represents “the science” on the pandemic and accuse those that criticize it of having an anti-scientific position. But the entire science of lockdowns is not founded on some incontestable scientific facts. From the infamous apocalyptic scenarios that were projected in the Imperial College models, to the way the idea of social distancing was elaborated in the preparedness plans for a potential influenza pandemic in the 2000s, to the way social conditions have been underestimated, it is obvious that we are not dealing with “neutral” scientific theories and facts. What is missing here is something that used to be one of the main traits of the radical left, namely, an insistence that science and technology are not neutral. It is as if an entire tradition of critical approaches to science and technology has been forgotten. (…) We have to acknowledge that there is a huge gap between a Left that has confidence in science and fights against all forms of irrationalism and one that subscribes to the logic that policy should be simply dictated by unelected specialists. A pandemic is, in the last instance, a social and political condition and there is a class aspect to the different responses, which are not neutral. This is especially important when the measures dictated or proposed by unelected specialists include the authoritarian suspension of basic democratic rights.
- Elizabeth Renieris, What’s at stake with vaccine passports (Out 2021):
(…) rather than thinking about vaccine passports as
temporary, isolated, public health-related measures, we should view them as
just one example of how the pandemic is accelerating the rollout of digital
identity infrastructure and consider the broader implications for society,
particularly as commercial and economic incentives predominate. (…) If 9/11
ushered in an era of mass surveillance, the pandemic has the potential to
introduce the “ID turn” or the age of ubiquitous identification and the end of
anonymity. Such a shift would, in turn, threaten the notion of “public” life,
which requires the ability to be one of many in the crowd. In this way, what
may appear to be temporary public health-related measures could risk embedding
permanent digital identity infrastructure without our full consideration of the
consequences.
- Georges Ugeux, On a utilisé le canon pour tuer une mouche - et on n’a même pas réussi à tuer la mouche (Fev 2021):
(…) Le
problème n°1 dans le monde politique d’aujourd’hui, c’est une absence
d’empathie et de compréhension des conséquences de leurs décisions. (…) [Sa
cause:] C’est l’avènement de la toute-puissance médicale. Elle a permis au
gouvernement de justifier ce qu’il faisait – et ce qu’il faisait, c’est ce que
les médecins lui disaient. S’il
y a une chose que je conseillerais aux gouvernement aujourd’hui, c’est de
remplacer la moitié des médecins dans tous les comités, et de les remplacer par
des psychologues, des sociologues et des philosophes. Parce que le corps
médical a une profonde défiance par rapport à tout ce qui touche à la santé
mentale. (…) [Sur le discours de la peur] On délivre aux gens un discours
totalement anxiogène et négativiste, disant uniquement que les choses seront
pires demain, et comme ce virus est un problème sérieux, les gens ne voient
plus les faits. (…) Cette espèce de copie conforme du modèle chinois, qui
existe encore aujourd’hui, et l’absence de remise en question de l’aspect
autoritaire de ce fonctionnement est évidemment une menace pour la démocratie.
(…) Les médias se sont complètement alignés sur la communication
gouvernementale et celle des médecins. Et ensuite, ils en ont rajouté une
couche en dramatisant.
PT
- Rui V. Pereira, Vem aí o neo-medievalismo (Dez 2021):
(…) Resumamos então o nosso quadro clínico: – uma elite mediática e política que fala em nome de todo um povo, sem dele ter recebido mandato; – uma elite mediática que distorce e mal-interpreta os dados estatísticos, nomeadamente os dados relativos à pandemia (seja por iliteracia, seja por má-fé – não nos compete fazer julgamentos de intenção, mas apenas constatar os seus efeitos objectivos), transformando a luz em trevas; – uma elite mediática e política que chuta para fora as culpas dos seus próprios disparates ou das forças da Natureza; noutros tempos, chamava-se a isto «castigo divino»; – o reerguer de muros e outros entraves à circulação das pessoas, como na Idade Média, imputando culpas às populações e pondo-as umas contra as outras; – a mistificação das causas e processos dos fenómenos naturais; – o silenciamento ou punição (por meio de perda de emprego e outros direitos) das vozes divergentes da corrente hegemónica; – etc. Este quadro clínico aponta para uma infecção ditatorial em curso. Qual o desfecho e qual a estirpe, ainda estamos para saber. Mas os sinais estão lá e são claros.
- Vítor Belanciano, Iliteracia científica e mediática (Set 2021):
(…) A
ciência, como os media, tem potencialidades e limites. Hoje é evidente que a
crise pandémica está numa nova fase graças à ciência, mas também ficou patente
que a resolução de problemas de saúde pública é tanto mais eficaz quanto se faz
com múltiplos saberes, alguns até não científicos, porque nenhuma forma de conhecimento,
por si só, capta as inúmeras experiências da realidade. Se alguma conclusão
pode ser tirada hoje, é a de que a pandemia é um fenómeno social total, que não
pode ser entendido, nem enfrentado, com base num único tipo de sabedoria. (…)
Neste cenário, não espanta que muitos tendam a converter modelos, hipóteses,
cenários ou pareceres de cientistas em verdades. Da mesma forma que se
banalizou a expressão “negacionistas”, colocando-se no mesmo saco quem produz
teorias da conspiração, grupos extremistas que manobram politicamente a
situação, quem nega sem sustentação o conhecimento científico, mas também quem
expõe dúvidas razoáveis. (…) Um dos problemas de algum jornalismo foi ter-se
convencido (e, nesse movimento, persuadido muita gente) de que era neutral ou
sinónimo de verdade. Criou uma expectativa para si próprio, e para o público,
impossível de cumprir, que se virou contra ele mesmo…
- António Ferreira, Exigir prestação de contas (Ago 2021):
Quando um Estado viola direitos
elementares dos cidadãos é obrigado a provar que, ao fazê-lo, está a
protegê-los contra um perigo iminente e concreto – digamos, a pandemia de
Covid-19. E é obrigado a provar que as medidas adotadas, que conduziram a essa
violação, são efetivamente eficazes na proteção dos mesmos cidadãos. Essa prova
nunca nos foi apresentada. Foi substituída por mera propaganda. (…) não se
trata, apenas, de exigir a assunção de responsabilidade política, cujas
consequências são, neste país, irrelevantes. Não! Trata-se de empreender as
ações necessárias para avaliar de modo totalmente independente os reais efeitos
(não os propagandeados) e consequências das medidas adotadas, quer no que
concerne à evolução da pandemia propriamente dita, quer no que toca aos
resultados sociais, económicos, na saúde e na privação dos mais elementares
direitos de cidadania e, se for caso disso, acionar as instituições apropriadas
para a responsabilização dos seus autores.
Tomadas de posição colectivas
- França: Carta aberta de apelo ao exercício do espírito
crítico (Ago 2021): https://qg.media/2021/08/30/tribune-a-t-on-encore-le-droit-dexercer-son-esprit-critique-en-france/
- Canadá: Carta aberta aos não-vacinados (Ago 2021): https://www.apar.tv/societe/lettre-ouverte-aux-non-vaccines/ https://ocla.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2021-08-02-A-Letter-to-the-Unvaccinated.pdf
- Rome Declaration and Physicians
Declaration II – Global Covid Summit (International Alliance of Physicians and
Medical Scientists, Oct 2021): https://doctorsandscientistsdeclaration.org/
- Espanha:
Manifiesto por una salida razonable a la crisis de la Covid (Nov 2021): https://salidarazonablecovid.es/ Tradução PT
- Portugal: Reconquistar o direito a viver – carta aberta de médicos portugueses sobre medidas sanitárias (Jul 2021): https://www.publico.pt/2021/07/16/opiniao/opiniao/reconquistar-direito-viver-1970426
Vídeos sobre propaganda, manipulação de massas e papel dos media
Genéricos:
- ‘J’accepte’ (TerPacific, 2007): https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1zg25 (versão orig. FR); ‘post’ meu com tradução do texto: https://transicaodisrupcao2021.blogs.sapo.pt/6693.html
-
‘You’ve felt it your entire life’ (Elina St-Onge; Collective Evolution, 2012): https://youtu.be/pXVwAnUjpIk
-
‘We want your soul’, Adam Freeland (2003; video 2012): https://youtu.be/C09lJQ4Blks
- Vídeos do projecto ‘Academy of Ideas’ sobre propaganda, psicose de massas e papel dos ‘mass media’ (2021): https://youtu.be/09maaUaRT4M; https://youtu.be/fdzW-S8MwbI; https://youtu.be/JeliRVZ4V00; https://youtu.be/6VfJ0BJvt7Y; https://youtu.be/5okSlrbgELA
‘Posts’ com textos dos vídeos: https://academyofideas.com/2021/02/mass-psychosis-greatest-threat-to-humanity/ https://academyofideas.com/2021/04/manufacturing-of-a-mass-psychosis-can-sanity-return-to-an-insane-world/ https://academyofideas.com/2021/09/how-to-escape-from-a-sick-society/ https://academyofideas.com/2021/09/the-big-lie-how-to-enslave-the-world/ https://academyofideas.com/2021/11/mainstream-media-a-threat-to-freedom-and-sanity/
Sobre a cobertura mediática da pandemia:
- ‘Ceci n’est pas un complot’,
Bernard Crutzen (2021): https://linktr.ee/CNPC_2020
- Vídeos do comediante britânico Russell Brand (canal YT) – p. ex.: https://youtu.be/iO53vfhuqAA
