Call Us by Our Names
Proposed Terminology for Responses to Covid Narrative and Policies
It has long been observed that with most crises, like the run ups to war, about 1/3 are for, 1/3 against and 1/3 in the middle, more or less.
Belgian psychologist, Mattias Desmet has raised our awareness about three groupings regarding Covid; those who accept the official narrative, those who go along with the dominant position and those who challenge the official narrative, which seems far less than even 20%. He notes that members of this groups are surprisingly heterogenous.
When I get together with my kindred spirits, a tiny progressive minority within the minority who challenge the official Covid narrative, usually at local potlucks in DC or Philadelphia, I often ask people how they refer to us. They usually hesitate and try to think of a label.
People tend to have more flattering labels for their group and emotionally charged, insulting names for members of newly designated “enemies.” The biggest propaganda campaign in history has tragically triggered unprecedented hostility.
Several labels come up for each group. After 3 years, it is curious that no catchy names have stuck. I am not aware of any consistent, satisfying terminology. I will attempt to do so here. I intend to be constructive and hopefully preempt destructive language which abounds. I welcome your ideas, and suggestions in the comments.
The Act of Naming: Terminology of Types
It is important to call things by their real names that are accurate, descriptive of behavior, (not provocative, disparaging or insulting), consciousness raising, forgiving and demystifying.
Language can stimulate images, thoughts, attitudes and behavior. Word usage has consequences. The act of naming is an act of framing which can, and has, dehumanized the Other in ways that do not serve any of us or help us find a way to live together as we hopefully emerge from this global nightmare.
Note the groups described below refer to the public and not to the mastermind perpetrators I described in BETRAYAL ALL THE WAY DOWN: PART 1 ]
Classification of Responses to Covid Narrative and Policies
These terms are intended to be undeniably descriptive of behavior, neutral, respectful, and accurate. Most in any group are not “bad people” because of their position.
Percentages are mostly based on approximations of others, except Veridos, likely less than 5%. I welcome other estimates based on data in comments.
Compliants (30%) accept the official narrative and follow CDC directives without question. They trust government agencies, doctors, “scientists,” local authorities, schools and what they hear 24/7 on all media with no alternative views. They don’t have time, energy, confidence, knowledge, skills or feel a need to do their own research. Since they are convinced of the narrative which has been highly crafted to appear plausible, true, consistent and coherent beyond doubt, they are not curious and see no value or purpose in dialogue. What they have been told repeatedly by unchallenged respected authorities, like “safe and effective” seems to line up with human history and what they have believed since childhood. They have been successfully fear-mongered, frightened to death and are cautious.
They have been called hypnotized, blue-pillers, Covidians, Covidiots, drinking the Kool Aid. I will call them Compliants because they eagerly comply with CDC guidelines, follow mandates and often try to make sure others comply as well.
Conformists (40%) may harbor doubts but go along with the dominant group out of insecurity, fear, social pressure, avoidance of rejection, isolation, job loss, and restrictions. Their behavior does not necessarily reflect their belief system. They may be open to dialogue when safe. When the tide turns, they will likely follow.
They have been called Normies. I will call them Conformists.
Refuseniks (20 – 30%) the term for Jews who applied to leave the USSR in the 1970s, were refused and then surveilled. I am repurposing this as a behavioral description for those refusing Covid spikeshots. They are immune to propaganda.
They include
· Skeptical Blacks who know the history of medical experimentation, not limited to the infamous Tuskegee experiment
· Gays and others who remember Fauci’s exploitation of AIDS, denial of natural remedies, preventable deaths from AZT
· Health and nutrition conscious people familiar with natural, integrative, functional, and regenerative medicine who understand the immune system.
· Others familiar with government deception.
They see through the official narrative. They actively seek out independent sources of information that are censored on MSM. About 30% of the US public have refused the Covid spikeshots, aka “vaccines.” They play it safe, self-censor, and discern when, where and to whom to speak. This can be a matter of both personality and/or rational calculation of dangers.
They have been called “vaccine hesitant,” naïve and in need of “nudging,” persuasion, rewards like Krispie Kremes, (great for the immune system), money, joints, etc., selfish, dangerous “anti-vaxxers” deserving of rejection, refusal of treatment, and even deserving of death, Republicans, crazy, stupid, propagandized. I will call them Refuseniks.
Remorseniks™, for those who got the shots, or whose loved ones were harmed or killed by the shots, who felt remorse, educated themselves and committed to seeking and exposing truth. This is a growing number as people are informed and supported following trauma from injuries and deaths.
Those injured have been dismissed as having nothing to do with the shots, abandoned, told to shut up to not cause “vaccine hesitancy” in others. They have been misdiagnosed with psychological diagnoses and sent to psych wards, put on psych meds, all adding insult and more injury to vax injury. They have to deal with the burden of regret.
Thankfully they have found each other and created a supportive community. I will call them Remorseniks™
Veridos™, maybe 5% or less initially but growing. They see through the deception, investigate it and challenge the official narrative.
I coined the term “Verido™” around 1995 while doing research on “The Courageous Personality: A Psychological Study of Moral Heroism.” Through interviews, I detected, that rather than a cognitive, rational process, that people who took great personal risks had an instinctual drive for truth and justice, I called Verido, like Libido, the instinctual drive for sex. I am writing up my in-depth findings on “The Psychology of Veridos” and intend to publish on Substack in the next few days.
Veridos are truly courageous and incapable of remaining silent. All have been censored, demonized, retaliated against, de-platformed, restricted, lost reputations, jobs and livelihoods, rejected by lifelong friends, relatives and colleagues, excluded from social events. People who have known, even loved and admired Veridos for years and decades believe that they suddenly became crazy, naive or stupid.
Veridos are called selfish, dangerous, right-wing, Republican, propagandized Trump supporters, patronizingly called “vaccine hesitant” when attempting coercion through rewards, and “anti-vaxxers” when shifting strategy from rewards to punishments. Veridos may call themselves dissidents, pariahs, red-pillers, awakened, not drinking the Kool Aid. I am calling us Veridos, active seekers of truth.
Note: Most Veridos are also either Refuseniks or Remorseniks,
Note: There are people who are Veridos in other domains, like the war in Ukraine, or any other issue, who may be Compliant and Conformist with Covid, which has the biggest propaganda campaign in human history, compounded by other dynamics like being frightened to death.
Let me know in comments if and how you think this might be helpful as well as other terms you have heard and any that you might suggest. I hope this raises consciousness. I will continue to work on psychological aspects of this collective trauma, analyses and strategies for healing and emerging from this as well as possible.
Stay tuned for the results of my research in “The Psychology of Veridos™” coming soon.
I am strangely straddling a few. I could theoretically be called a "remorsenic" for having the first shot due to the extreme pressure of an impending job mandate, my spouse threatening divorce and making my life unbearabe (despite my unswerving devotion to my marriage and vows, still, to this day), my kids not listening to me and taking the shot, and general alienation for my views. Yet I went in absolutely, fully aware that it was 100% the wrong thing to do. I had "pre-remorse", for want of a better way to describe it. I had read extensively, was completely cognisant of the danger, ineffectiveness and insanity of the shots. Moreover, I had had Covid and was mostly recovered, other than persisting anosmia. I knew it was unnecessary - even potentially more dangerous for me, as a recovered person with strong, tested antibodies. Yet I did it, as the only way out of my trap. Like a fox chewing off its leg.
The only thing I can liken it to was extreme existential despair, hopelessness, and the equivalent of a silent suicide pact with my unaware family.
My death-wish ended there. I did not go on to have more. My despair, while not gone, is now amplified with a rage so absolute that it enabled me to help mobilise colleagues, start fighting back against my employer, and gave me a steely determination to subvert this thing as much as I possibly could - while still clinging to what I held dear for as long as I could. This is something that many don't appreciate. The juggling act that many of us have had to perform. I will not let this vile "thing" destroy my marriage and kids without a fight. EVEN THOUGH it has actually conscripted them. My subversion at home is the most difficult and delicate thing of all. I have to try and do it, without trying to do it. Sometimes it has to be via the merest gossamer whispers.
So, while names are useful, they are not fully encompassing.
I think it is important to first name the movement. I like the term "Medical Freedom Movement."
My identity as a Progressive is no longer accurate, due to the mass conversion of Progressives into pro-war, pro-censorship, unquestioning Democrats. A year ago, watching Breaking Points, I learned that a new term had been invented: Social Libertarian (aka Barstool Conservative). I also call myself Politically Homeless.
I'm not a fan of newly coined words. They're too hard to remember. Rather than Verido, I prefer Truth Teller. These people are my heroes. High integrity is their outstanding characteristic.