This Week in the Guardian #18

Every week we like to highlight three or four stories that go full-Guardian, but don’t require an entire article of refutation.

We encourage reader-participation here, so if you come across something you feel should be included in the next edition either post a link below, or send us an e-mail.

If we can grow cruelty-free meat in a lab, what is there to beef about?

The push for “food reform” is going to be an integral part of the Great Reset, through the pushing of vegan diets, edible insects, taxes on meat, fat or sugar, George Monbiot’s edible slime or lab grown meat.

This article by Barbara Ellen – one of the Guardian’s shallowest thinkers, which is really saying something – is painting the fake lab-grown meat as a compromise on veganism. She’s selling it as “meat without the cruelty” and a possible end to farming…which is bizarre.

What do these people think will happen to all the chickens, pigs, sheep and cows if we end the practice of farming animals for food? Are they imagining they’ll all live care-free lives in some kind of farm-zoo?

Because they won’t. They’ll be slaughtered, and because of the insane world we live in, eating the slaughtered animals will be labelled “cruel”, so they’ll probably be burned instead. Nobody will say anything about that being bad for the environment.

Ending animal cruelty by getting rid of all the animals is an interesting plan.

Enemies of the sheeple: why do pop stars fall for conspiracy theories?

The Guardian is attacking musicians who express any kind of doubt about the “pandemic” narrative as a way of stifling dissent and trying to label Covid “conspiracy theories” as the domain of out of touch celebrities who don’t know what they’re talking about.

There’s an awful lot of cod psychology, but very few facts or figures. An awful lot of sarcastic jibes, but no quotes from the people concerned. There’s actually been very little basic research done at all.

A case in point is the (totally unsourced) anecdote in the opening paragraph:

At the 1967 Monterey pop festival, David Crosby of the Byrds treated the audience to his thoughts on the murder of JFK. “He was not killed by one man,” Crosby declared. “He was shot from a number of different directions by different guns. The story has been suppressed, witnesses have been killed, and this is your country.” This incident, perhaps the first high-profile case of a musician airing a conspiracy theory, is one reason why Crosby was fired from the band.

Dorian Lynskey, the author of the of this insufferable article, is attempting to paint Crosby’s view on the JFK assassination as a fringe view which is not backed up by evidence. But that’s totally the opposite of the truth. Not only is there a wealth of evidence supporting the idea of multiple gunmen in Dallas on November 22nd 1963, but the vast majority of the American public agree with Crosby’s view and always have.

Lynsky didn’t do this simple bit of fact-checking, because it’s not his job. He is just a music writer. That is all. He’s not an historian, scientist or psychologist (you can tell that by his work).

Why, then, the Guardian have paid him to write about the motivations of people he does not know in discussing issues he does not understand is anyone’s guess.

To answer the headline’s question: “Why do pop stars believe conspiracy theories?”

The same reason plumbers or real estate agents or mechanics do. Because they are human beings capable of reading, understanding and forming their own opinions (which, it must be said, is more than can be said for people who write for The Guardian).

To sum this up in brief terms – this is a shabby attempt by a “journalist” to smear and belittle free-thinking individuals by playing on the natural biases and inherent resentments of his readers.

To be even briefer: It’s a smug prat doing smug prat things.

How the ‘great reset’ of capitalism became an anti-lockdown conspiracy

It turns out the Great Reset everyone’s talking about isn’t really happening. Ignore all the slogans and adverts and politicians using the phrase. Ignore the video’s produced by the World Economic Forum literally titled “The Great Reset”.

None of that really happened.

…OK, so technically it “happened”, whatever that means, but not in the way it looks. It’s just about planting some trees. Honest. All the stuff about social control and attacks on personal freedom is just an alt-right conspiracy theory being peddled by Fox News.

At least, according to the academic the Guardian roped into making a fool of himself for 3 pounds per word. His name is Quinn Slobodian and he’s apparently a college professor, which is a sad indictment of the US education system if nothing else.

In his opening paragraph he says this:

In its most implausible version, this conspiracy imagines that a global elite is using Covid-19 as an opportunity to roll out radical policies such as forced vaccinations, digital ID cards and the renunciation of private property.

…without mentioning that literally every single one of those policies has been suggested at some point this year.

Later he drops this beautifully deceptive use of language [our emphasis]:

Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, added $13bn to his fortune in just a day. With surreal realities like these, where prominent members of the 1% really do appear to have gained from the pandemic,

Bezos “appears” to have gained? Sorry, but gaining 13 billion dollars in a single day is not “appearing to gain from the pandemic”…it’s “gaining from the pandemic”. Apparently, the author can’t even cede that small reality to the people he’s seeking to denigrate.

After dismissing the Great Reset as “nonsense” and “implausible”, he launches into a defense of Klaus Schwab, the head of the WEF. What he doesn’t mention is that that Klaus Schwab literally wrote a book called “Covid19: The Great Reset”, and published it in July.

One direct quote from this book:

the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism.”

This goes hand-in-hand with calls for a “new normal” and that we can “never go back” to how things were and we must “build back better”. That means cashless societies and social distancing and masks forever,

Joe Biden’s looming government are already using the term “Great Reset” themselves, not just about Covid19 but about climate change as well.

It would be easy to dismiss the piece as drivel, but it’s actually rather more sinister and deceptive than that. It’s a masterclass in manipulative rhetoric. He concedes every valuable piece of information and yet veers away from the only logical conclusion, inviting his readers into a world of cognitive dissonance.

1. He readily admits that the Great Reset initiative is real, and was launched by the WEF in the summer.
2. He openly states that the richest 0.1% have already made a fortune from the pandemic, and will likely continue to do so.
3. He acknowledges “Shock Doctrine”, and that in the past crises have been used to pass laws which enrich the elites.

…but despite these admissions, he won’t admit that the “conspiracy theory” has any grounds in reality.

The article is the like a man standing on the deck of the Titanic, his trousers rolled up past his knees, trying to convince the panicking crowd that water is just a conspiracy theory.

“All right,” he says, “yes it appears the ship is sinking into something, and fine we’re all wetter and colder than we were an hour ago, but honestly, that doesn’t mean there’s any water! I certainly can’t see any!”

BONUS: How to deal with conspiracy theorists

Two different articles appeared this week – one specifically about vaccines, one about conspiracies in general – detailing how to “handle” conspiracy theorists.

One of them was written by a “behavioural consultant” who works for the Total Media Group, a company which identifies as a “behavioural planning agency”. Essentially they are a marketing agency which uses biometrics and psychological triggers to try and control people. It is every bit as creepy as it sounds.

The “behavioural consultant” says that we shouldn’t get angry with the poor deluded souls, because they’ll just become entrenched. Instead just pressure anyone who doesn’t want to get vaccinated by forcing it to become a “social norm” that people won’ question.

The second article is all about rhetorical tricks – the ones us “conspiracy theorists” use, and the ones that can be used against us.

Neither of them consider for a second that a) they might be incorrect or b) They should ever attempt to have an honest, fact-based conversation in good faith. Very telling.

* * *

All told, a busy week for The Guardian. And we didn’t even mention giving column inches to Peter Mandelson to or their sickening puff pieces about the “miracle vaccine” and crying immunologists.

Did we miss anything? Tell us about it in the comments below, and keep an eye out for articles that should go in the next issue.