1

Resisting Tyranny Depends on the Courage to Not Conform

By Barry Brownstein | American Institute for Economic Research  

Social psychologist Roy Baumeister begins his book Evil: Inside Human Violence and Cruelty, with a proposition that will be counterintuitive to many: “Evil usually enters the world unrecognized by the people who open the door and let it in. Most people who perpetrate evil do not see what they are doing as evil.”

Dismissing evildoers as “insane” is an attempt to absolve both them and you of responsibility. Baumeister observes, “People do become extremely upset and abandon self-control, with violent results, but this is not insanity.” If only “insane” people commit “evil” acts, you might reason there is no need to strengthen spiritual and moral muscles. You might skip the reflection, study, and practice that builds spiritual and moral strength.

Would you, Baumeister asks, “obey orders to kill innocent civilians? Would you help torture someone? Would you stand by passively while the secret police hauled your neighbors off to concentration camps?” Baumeister writes, “Most people say no. But when such events actually happen, the reality is quite different.” Today, to the point, will you obey orders to fire upon people who refuse to comply with mandates?

In one of the most instructive books about Nazi Germany, Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland, historian Christopher Browning explores why most people say yes and commit heinous acts even when given latitude to say no.

The men of Police Battalion 101 were not specially selected, psychopathic killers. Initially, the Battalion was set up to enforce Nazi rule in occupied Poland. Eventually, their mission changed, bringing them to be the genocidal murderers of Jews they were charged with rounding up. Browning explains, “The bulk of the killers were not specially selected but drawn at random from a cross-section of German society, and they did not kill because they were coerced by the threat of dire punishment for refusing.” Mostly they were “middle-aged reserve policemen.” Battle had not driven these men to depravity, “they had not been fired on nor had they lost comrades.”

Browning explores one of their initial murderous actions, “shooting some 1,500 Jews in the Polish village of Józefów in the summer of 1942.” Major Wilhelm Trapp addressed his men before the shooting began: “Pale and nervous, with choking voice and tears in his eyes, Trapp visibly fought to control himself as he spoke. The Battalion, he said plaintively, had to perform a frightfully unpleasant task. This assignment was not to his liking; indeed, it was highly regrettable, but the orders came from the highest authorities.”

Trapp provided a “justification” for the coming slaughter—Jews were damaging Germany and threatening German troops—but then Trapp “made an extraordinary offer: if any of the older men among them did not feel up to the task that lay before him, he could step out.” The task, Trapp outlined, was the immediate killing of all women, children, and the elderly.

Only twelve of the approximately 500 in the Battalion initially took Trapp’s offer to “step out.” Browning estimated “10 to 20 percent of those actually assigned to the firing squads” extricated themselves “by less conspicuous methods or asked to be released from the firing squads once the shooting had begun.” Yet for most of the police, killing became second nature: “Many reserve policemen who were horrified in the woods outside Józefów… subsequently became casual volunteers for numerous firing squads and ‘Jew hunts.’”

Browning’s research provides insights into the mindsets that fueled obedience: “Who would have ‘dared,’ one policeman declared emphatically, to ‘lose face’ before the assembled troops.” Another said, “No one wants to be thought a coward.”

Not all who followed orders lacked moral consciousness: “Another policeman—more aware of what truly required courage—said quite simply, ‘I was cowardly.’”

Some rationalized their atrocities: “It was possible for me to shoot only children. My neighbor then shot the mother and I shot the child that belonged to her because I reasoned with myself that after all without its mother the child could not live any longer.”

To escape moral culpability, others offered the excuse of what difference could they make: “Without me [shooting] the Jews were not going to escape their fate anyway.” How many managers are saying today, what difference can I make? If I don’t fire the unvaccinated, someone else will.

Browning explains, “The men’s concern for their standing in the eyes of their comrades was not matched by any sense of human ties with their victims. The Jews stood outside their circle of human obligation and responsibility.” Today, hospital administrators are firing workers with robust natural immunity who faithfully served during the pandemic and refuse the vaccine. Like the men in the Battalion, these administrators are just following orders.

What would have happened that terrible day in 1942 if more policemen recognized the humanity of the “other” and had the courage to not conform? Today, what would happen if more businesses, like In-N-Out Burger, refuse to obey government edicts? In October, Stephen Davis, a Florida fire battalion chief, “was fired for refusing to discipline department employees listed as unvaccinated.” What would happen if more managers had the courage of Chief Davis? Without obedience, tyranny fails.

During this time of Covid, we can learn lessons from Browning’s book about how we treat people who make choices different from our own. We can notice when we fail to see the humanity in others. We can become aware when we justify us vs. them mindset. We can question our perceptions. To wait for Biden or Fauci to change first is to ignore our power of choice.

Lessons Learned

Browning reflects on the actions of the Battalion and asks, “If obedience to orders out of fear of dire punishment is not a valid explanation, what about ‘obedience to authority in the more general sense used by Stanley Milgram?”

Browning wonders if there is “a ’deeply ingrained behavior tendency’ to comply with the directives of those positioned hierarchically above, even to the point of performing repugnant actions in violation of ‘universally accepted’ moral norms.” Browning explains,

The notions of ‘loyalty, duty, discipline,’ requiring competent performance in the eyes of authority, become moral imperatives overriding any identification with the victim. Normal individuals enter an ‘agentic state’ in which they are the instrument of another’s will. In such a state, they no longer feel personally responsible for the content of their actions but only for how well they perform.

Browning recounts, “Milgram made direct reference to the similarities between human behavior in his experiments and under the Nazi regime. He concluded, ‘Men are led to kill with little difficulty.’”

Importantly, “Milgram himself notes that people far more frequently invoke authority than conformity to explain their behavior, for only the former seems to absolve them of personal responsibility.” Yet, in the Battalion case, “Many policemen admitted responding to the pressures of conformity—how would they be seen in the eyes of their comrades?—not authority.” Based on his research, Browning concludes, “Conformity assumes a more central role than authority at Józefów.”

The Covidocracy demands we all conform and shames those who make different choices. Browning explains the dangers of a culture of shame: “The shame culture, making conformity a prime virtue, impelled ordinary Germans in uniform to commit terrible crimes rather than suffer the stigma of cowardice and weakness and the ‘social death’ of isolation and alienation vis-à-vis their comrades.”

The segregation of Jews was an enabler of evil actions. Browning points to pervasive banishment of Jews from German society “and the resulting exclusion of the Jewish victims from any common ground with the perpetrators made it all the easier for the majority of the policemen to conform to the norms of their immediate community (the battalion) and their society at large (Nazi Germany).”

For some policemen who did not shoot, their commercial ties shaped their view of human beings. One said, “Through my business experience, especially because it extended abroad, I had gained a better overview of things. Moreover, through my earlier business activities, I already knew many Jews.”

Harvard social psychologist Gordon Allport developed his famed contact hypothesis in the 1940s: “Increasing exposure to out-group members will improve attitudes toward that group and decrease prejudice and stereotyping.” Commercial ties bring people together.

Today, politicians work overtime demonizing, mocking, and punishing “out-group members” who won’t obey their dictates.

A Story of Nonconformity

Recently Tim, a reader and business owner from New Zealand, sent me his powerful testimony in an email:

Fifty odd years ago, as a young child I went to Ranui Primary School in suburban Auckland. There were two Māori boys in my class of 9-year-olds. Sometimes through the day they would make short comments to each other in Māori.

If the teacher heard them do it, he would keep our entire class in detention after school for 15 to 30 minutes. I always hated it because one of the boys was my friend, and a regular playmate of mine after school. The other one, used to walk home from school with me too, they were my friends.

But most of the class blamed these two Māori boys for us all being locked in after school. The majority of the kids disliked and bullied them in my class.

I couldn’t do it; I couldn’t dislike them because they were my friends. Perhaps even then as a boy I could see what our teacher was doing.

Our teacher was using the rest of the class as a weapon against those two young boys by encouraging the spiteful and discriminating attitudes towards them.

Tim’s choice to not conform to social pressure made all the difference to his Māori friends. Did Tim’s ability to see the humanity in others help him become a successful entrepreneur? After all, entrepreneurs succeed when they help serve the needs of others.

Tim continued his testimony:

Today, 50 years later, I am again feeling the same way as I did back in my Ranui Primary School class. The teacher is telling us all that we will continue to be locked in until 90% (or whatever) of the country is vaccinated. And further, we are told that it is the fault of the 20% (or so) that have so far chosen not to accept the two shots in the arm.

As a country, we are all encouraged to heap blame and hate towards anyone who has decided to not vaccinate.

Regardless of my own vaccination status, I have friends and family who I refuse to hate or blame.

I lay the blame exactly where it belongs. At the feet of my Primary School teacher for our detentions, not my two boyhood friends.

And at the feet of our Prime Minister for her lockdown rules, not my friends and family who have chosen to decline an injection that they don’t trust, rightly or wrongly.

Be like Tim. Be like the 10-20% of Battalion 101 who didn’t conform. Our scorn should be towards those who demand our obedience and split America into an in-group and an out-group. Become more aware when you allow your thinking to be hijacked by propaganda.

Many in the Battalion didn’t understand their crimes until decades after the war ended. Don’t wait to reflect until a future historian writes a book about how you supported tyranny by placing conformity above human rights.

Today Charles Eisenstein points out, “Many people trust the authorities and willingly comply with their rules. They face no dilemma, no initiatory moment, no self-defining world-creating choice point, not yet.”

Conforming, lacking courage, will not spare you from choices that life will demand of you. Eisenstein challenges us: “As the authorities’ narratives devolve into absurdity and their rules devolve into oppression, more and more of us face this choice: … To do what you know is right, or to cave into the pressure, consoling yourself with words you don’t believe. ‘I had no choice.’”

We all have a personal responsibility for preserving freedom. The price of abdicating our responsibility is high. As Browning puts it, Germans paid a high price for “placing uncritical trust in the ‘firm leadership’ of seemingly well-intentioned political authority between 1933 and 1945.”

Barry Brownstein

Barry Brownstein

Barry Brownstein is professor emeritus of economics and leadership at the University of Baltimore.

He is a senior contributor at Intellectual Takeout and the author of The Inner-Work of Leadership.

Get notified of new articles from Barry Brownstein and AIER.



Political Satirist Takes Up the Fight Against Tyranny

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • CJ Hopkins, a playwright, novelist, and columnist describes the two phases of implementation of the Great Reset as an initial shock-and-awe phase, followed by a more insidious reprogramming phase in which we’re trained to accept our lot as subjugated slaves within a totalitarian control system
  • Phase 2 includes the implementation of a segregation system based on vaccination requirements
  • In the U.S., 14 states have implemented laws banning the requirement of vaccine passports to prevent a two-tier society from forming. In Europe, however, due to the smaller sizes of each country, it’s easier to impose ideological uniformity
  • The lifting of mask mandates for vaccinated individuals is a strategy to coerce compliance with vaccination. Being coerced into compliance to “regain” basic human freedom is no freedom at all
  • It’s crucial to push back against all efforts to implement social segregation of unvaccinated individuals. You do this with peaceful civil disobedience, and insisting on not being discriminated against

In this interview, CJ Hopkins, an American playwright, novelist, and columnist who currently resides in Berlin, Germany, discusses the implementation of the globalist plan for a new normal, also known as the Great Reset. The first year or two of Phase 1, Hopkins describes as the “shock-and-awe” phase.

“It’s pretty classic,” he says. “It’s the hysteria that was rolled out right at the beginning of [the COVID-19 pandemic]. We had the fake pictures of people dropping dead in the streets in China, and they were advertising a 3.4% death rate. Hundreds of millions of people were going to die.

States of emergency were declared. I covered all of this with citations in my early columns. Basically, a police state was rolled out and everyone was locked down. Here in Europe, the police were arresting people for being outside without permission. Neighbors started reporting their neighbors for going outdoors without a mask or beyond curfew.

That was pretty much the whole first year. This was really shock and awe. It feels like now we’re moving into Phase 2 with the rollout of a social segregation system and vaccine passes. In a lot of ways, I feel like Phase 2 is going to be more insidious than Phase 1 was.”

What’s in Store for Phase 2?

While hesitant to predict what’s to come, Hopkins fears some version of the intended social segregation system will be implemented despite public pushback. “That really concerns me,” he says. Even partial implementation can be enough to get the proverbial foot in the door, so to speak, to allow a fuller implementation to occur later on.

In the U.S., resistance by certain states is encouraging. So far, 14 states have implemented laws banning the requirement of vaccine passports to prevent a two-tier society from forming. In Europe, however, due to the smaller sizes of each country, it’s easier to create the ideological uniformity required to impose these systems, so what happens there remains to be seen. When asked how he’s structuring his resistance to the plan for global tyranny, Hopkins replies:

“The main way is through my ‘Consent Factory’ columns. My essays. And through the ‘Consent Factory’ on social media. I try to whip up as much resistance and create as much awareness as I can and urge people to spread that and do the same. That’s what I do. My medium is words.

On a personal level, I think it’s really important not to cooperate with the system. For example, in Germany, they’re rolling out a segregation system so that if I want to go to a restaurant, a café, a nonessential store or attend the theater, I need to present either a proof of vaccination or a negative test within 24 hours to enter these establishments.

I think it’s really important for those of us who are pushing back against this, to not play along. I’m going to try to go to the restaurants. I’m going to try to enter the stores.

And I want to make the people who have been made responsible for the system, I want to make them eject me, and I want to politely but loudly make it clear: ‘You’re ejecting me from your establishment because I’m not conforming to this insane ideological program.’ Hopefully, if a lot of people do this, enough social friction can be created and build resistance to it.”

Coerced Compliance Is Not a Return of Freedom

In the U.S., the lifting of mask mandates for vaccinated individuals only appears to be part of the more insidious style we can expect in Phase 2. In essence, it’s just another strategy to coerce compliance with vaccination. “Get the vaccine and you can have your freedom; you can go back to normal,” is the idea here.

But it’s a false freedom. Being coerced to comply with the demand to be a guinea pig for experimental gene therapy to “regain” basic human freedom is hardly freedom.

“This is what I mean by I think Phase 2 is going to be more insidious than Phase 1, because that’s exactly right. We’re getting this carrot-and-stick stuff,” Hopkins says. “Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton came out and tweeted, ‘Get vaccinated or wear a mask.’ That’s it. These are the choices …

My sense is the mask regulations will probably be the last thing to go here in Germany. Clearly, the masks, I think, were the primary means of generating the appearance of an apocalyptic plague that is threatening the very fabric of society. When people take off their masks, the illusion will just evaporate.”

Suffocating Censorship Abounds

As in the U.S., Germany and virtually all other countries are experiencing severe censorship of anything COVID-19 related. Hopkins describes the situation as “suffocating,” saying “it’s been one of the most impressive and frightening experiences that I can remember.”

Very quickly, the German media, government, and entertainment industry started marching in lockstep. Gleichschaltung is a German word that harkens back to the Nazi regime. Gleich means “the same” and scaling means “to switch.”

“What it means is basically synchronizing all aspects of culture, messaging and ideology in the society to make everything absolutely uniform and to eliminate all dissent,” Hopkins explains. “Of course, this is what the Nazis did, and this is exactly what I have witnessed here.

It happened almost instantly, in the spring of 2020. And it has been absolutely suffocating. Anyone protesting, questioning or challenging the official narrative has been demonized as a far-right conspiracy theorist, an anti-Semitic extremist. It’s been really intense.”

How Did We Get Here?

For many, myself included, the current reality is beyond surreal. It’s like living in a nightmare, hoping to wake up at any moment. How did we get here? Hopkins offers his personal take on the situation:

“I started writing political satire and commentary back in 2016. I did that because I got interested in the Donald Trump phenomenon. I’m not a fan of Donald Trump personally, but something new was happening and it caught my attention.

What I covered all during the Trump years was this unauthorized president got elected and it felt to me like this was part of a broader populist pushback against whatever you want to call it — global capitalist ideology is what I call it — and what we’ve been living with for the last 30 years since the fall of the Soviet Union …

Suddenly around 2016, there was Brexit and Trump and various reactionary populist movements rising up in Europe. It interested me. Here’s some resistance against the new ideology.

What I watched, what I described in my columns and in my books, was the system, the entire global system, and this is where it gets too simplistic to talk about because it’s not a bunch of capitalists sitting in a room, scheming and plotting all this out. It’s the system reacting to this insurgency, to this sort of populist rebellion inside of it.

And what they did is very clear. They made an example of Trump. They demonized him. They demonized everybody who put him in office. Really polarized society so that you were either a good Democrat or you were a white supremacist, racist, neo-Nazi monster. They did this for four years solid and, of course, it all culminated in 2020 when they removed Trump from office and then had the big spectacle of ‘restoring normality.’

I can’t help but see the rollout of the ‘new normal’ and this whole narrative, this introduction, of what I see as a more totalitarian version of global capitalist society. I see this in that same context.

A point that I always make about this is the lockdowns were the big thing in the beginning, right? And for most of the last year. Where does the concept of lockdown come from? Well, it comes from prisons. And when do you lock the prisoners down? You lock them down when they’re rebelling, when they’re rioting.

And you do it to remind them, ‘Hey, you’re in prison, and we can lock you down and impose any type of measures on you that we want, any time we want, until you start toeing the line.’ I cannot help but see what we’ve been through during this past year as part of that lesson that the ruling establishment, the system itself, is teaching us …

There’s a book that I recommend to everyone — especially to true believers if any of them are watching and they still have just a little bit of an open mind — by Milton Mayer, called ‘They Thought They Were Free.’ He was here in Germany in the 1930s as the Nazis came to power, as this ideological synchronization was rolled out. And what he describes mirrors almost exactly what we’ve been experiencing.

The context is completely different. It’s not a political ideology that’s being rolled out [now]. But just the introduction of this official narrative, this official ideology, and the coercion and implementation of police measures and the abrogation of the constitution [is the same as back then].

And people’s reactions to it and nonreactions to it. How it was all implemented step by step by step, the old ‘how to boil a frog’ thing. If you read that and compare it to what we’ve been through for the last year, it’s just horrifying.”

What Can We Do?

The book, “They Thought They Were Free,” is available as a free PDF download here. Now, if what we’re experiencing is subjugation training, how can we most effectively resist it? Certainly, we need to spread the word and collaborate with friends and neighbors, because if they’re listening to the mainstream media, they’re not getting this at all.

One of the most frightening parts of this is the attempts to coerce people into getting vaccinated with experimental gene therapy. What’s happening is absolutely 100% illegal and a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code, because the only way you can give informed consent to anything is to have both sides of the story.

But they are only presenting one side. Anything that opposes their narrative is immediately censored. People with any kind of following on social media are simply de-platformed. As a result, people have no idea what they’re getting themselves into.

Clearly, we have to realize that this is a long-term game. The globalists, the technocratic elite who are running this nightmare simulation, have been organizing and planning its execution for decades. They’re not flying by the seat of their pants. They have a long-term game plan, and we need to establish one too, even if, for the moment, we’re lagging.

“I think you’re absolutely right and this is why I brought up that term, Gleichschaltung, this synchronization,” Hopkins says. “It’s very clear to me, to you, to those of us who have been paying attention, the intensity of the effort to silence discussion. To silence dissent. To silence questioning.

To present this uniform ideological narrative … and there’s no room in it for questioning, for argument, for a discussion. If you question it, you are absolutely demonized. It makes it really difficult to communicate. I’m a satirist, so I think I kind of slip through the lines because maybe the censors don’t know if I’m serious or not.

It’s more difficult for people who are just trying to present facts and information because they’re getting completely shut out. I think we have to continue to try to do it no matter what. I think it’s important to repeatedly present the facts.

To repeatedly point out what happened at the beginning of this — All the propaganda. All the false information. Where [the virus] came from. The models. The way the PCR tests were used to generate the appearance that suddenly, perfectly healthy people became medical cases.”

How a Real-World Pandemic Simulation Was Created

That last point is an important one. We now know, rather unequivocally, that we did not have a lethal pandemic as much as we had a casedemic, meaning a pandemic of false-positive tests.

The vast majority were perfectly healthy, but because the PCR tests were run at a ridiculously and indefensibly high cycle threshold (CT), they picked up dead fragments of the virus, resulting in false positives. Medicine as we know it was suddenly turned on its head, and these healthy individuals were deemed “sick” based on flawed testing and nothing else.

Once actual death counts dropped, mainstream media reverted from flashing death statistics to “case” statistics, thereby making it appear as though the pandemic was raging, even as hospitals remained empty of COVID-19 patients.

“It’s so frustrating because you can’t get this through to people who are true believers,” Hopkins says. “First of all, the test was never meant to be diagnostic of illness. But the fact that you could turn this test up to 40, 50 cycles, and suddenly people who were perfectly healthy, with no symptoms of illness whatsoever, became medical cases.

The next step, of course, was to use that to inflate the deaths. Then people who were dying in hospitals, they didn’t have to be dying of [some other] illness anymore. If they were tested and the PCR test showed they had been infected, then they were COVID deaths. And then those statistics were exploded. They basically redefined traditional established scientific and medical knowledge.”

That too is a key point. The official narrative violates just about everything we know about medicine and science. And they did it simply by redefining terms. The World Health Organization redefined the word “pandemic.” The medical term “case” was redefined, as was the definition of a “COVID death.” They’ve redefined the term “herd immunity” and even the term “anti-vaxxer.”

According to Merriam-Webster, an “anti-vaxxer” is now anyone who opposes vaccination or simply disagrees with vaccine mandates. Based on this loosened definition, an estimated 79% of Americans are now anti-vaxxers.1 Most recently, they redefined what a “breakthrough case” is among the vaccinated.

It’s All About Manipulating Statistics

Those who define the terms control the narrative. Simply by redefining what constitutes illness, they’re able to dial the pandemic up and down at will. On the day President Biden was inaugurated, the pandemic was dialed back by the WHO simply lowering the recommended CT. By then, the vaccination program had begun, and to make the vaccines appear effective, the caseload needed to decline.

Unfortunately, breakthrough cases started appearing, meaningfully vaccinated individuals were being hospitalized for COVID-19. So, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention changed the definition of a breakthrough case and lowered the recommended CT when testing fully vaccinated individuals.2

The CDC no longer records mild or asymptomatic infections in vaccinated individuals as “COVID cases.” The only cases that now count as COVID cases — if the patient has been vaccinated against COVID-19 — are those that result in hospitalization or death.3,4 And, like magic, the vaccine effectiveness got a boost. Breakthrough cases dropped by several thousand overnight, from 10,262 (as of April 30, 2021)5 to 3,0166 (as of June 1, 2021).

Meanwhile, if you’re unvaccinated and come down with a mild case, or if you test positive at a higher CT and have no symptoms, you still count as a COVID case. So, we now have this remarkably unscientific and illogical situation where testing rules and definitions of illness vary depending on whether the patient is vaccinated or unvaccinated!

There’s only one reason for doing something as unprecedented as this: to manipulate statistics. This allows the CDC to inflate the caseload among unvaccinated people and minimize breakthrough cases among the vaccinated. The result is that unvaccinated people will appear more prone to infection, even though they’re not, and the vaccines will appear far more protective than they actually are.

“The reason it is so difficult to resist is [because] this simulation has been created through all of these means that we’re talking about, and the people who believe in this simulation — I’ve likened them to cult members — there’s no shaking their belief in this,” Hopkins says.

“I think it’s important, nonetheless, to keep confronting them and presenting these facts to everybody. The other [strategy] is on a personal level, just as I was saying before.

I think it’s crucial that those of us who are not true believers in this new ideology continue to try to live according to reality, and refuse to reify it, refuse to behave according to these rules that are being imposed.

Fundamentally, the idea that anything about this virus requires a radical restructuring of society where I have to present my medical papers to get a cup of coffee is insane. It’s literally insane. And it’s important that those of us who continue to have a grip on reality treat it as insane, and not treat it as legitimate at all …”

More Information

To read more of what Hopkins has to say, please visit his website, cjhopkins.com, or blog, consentfactory.org. He also has a Substack and Patreon account where you can find his work.

In closing, I believe a major part of the solution is to develop alternative distribution networks that are censorship-resistant. Ultimately, we need a decentralized Internet. That’s currently in the works, but full implementation of it is bound to take years. In the meantime, we have to perfect online “guerilla tactics” to get around the censorship and form collaborative networks. We also need to engage in peaceful civil disobedience in our day-to-day lives. As noted by Hopkins:

“Until we get there, it’s crucial to continue to use whatever means. People are trying to avoid Facebook censors by playing with the fonts and the pictures and what have you. It’s another thing that people can study — in totalitarian societies, people adapted.

Everyone knew that the official sources were just pumping out propaganda, so, they learned how to speak and read between the lines. It might become more and more necessary to find ways to not say directly what you’re saying, but rather point to it so that it can lead other people to where you’re going. So, use whatever means are still available to get the facts, to get reality, out there.

Secondly, and I think just as important, back to my point about how we live our everyday lives. Go back to that restaurant where I have to show my vaccine pass or my test to sit down and get a cup of coffee. I have choices. I could choose to stay home. I could choose to get a counterfeit vax pass.

Neither one of those to me are the right choices because the choice is to go and demand that people treat me according to reality and not treat me according to the rules of their new ideology. Create that friction … I have no hostility to the server, but I want to make that server uncomfortable with what he or she is doing.

I want to make the other people who are sitting in the restaurant uncomfortable watching me be ejected, watching me be segregated because I don’t conform to this ideology. Maybe they all go home and sleep soundly. Maybe two of them are haunted by that moment.

Maybe they see another moment like that in another café the next day. Or at the cinema that night when they go out. The more moments they see of people standing up and saying, ‘This is insane and it is wrong and I’m not going to cooperate with it’ — all these little moments of friction, they can build and create the resistance that we need.”