In response to the rug-sweeping "amnesty" campaign of the recent Atlantic article
Earlier this week, an article was written in the Atlantic, called, Let’s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty. This Atlantic piece is one of the most cynical and vile gaslighting campaigns of the last few years because it aims to erase ALL of the gaslighting and crimes that have occurred during the entire pandemic. The title could’ve been, The Covert Narcissist’s Guide to Pandemic Gaslighting: The Art of Subtly Virtue-Signaling While Erasing History.
If you’ve been in an abusive relationship, you might be aware that covert abusers sometimes apologize without apologizing. It’s called a fauxpology. For example, they might say something like, “I’m sorry for everything.” Sorry for what, exactly? That’s not an apology. That’s an attempt at rug-sweeping and getting you to move on so they can erase history… then do it all over again.
The author, Emily Oster, is a Brown University economics professor. I don’t know if she wrote the article of her own volition or if it was commissioned by the Atlantic or another institution or handler. She proposes that we forgive the authoritarians and their enablers for their transgressions during the last three years when they were, “in the dark about COVID.” This is an interesting choice of words.
What is darkness?
It’s the opposite of light.
Light is love, truth, awareness, information, courage and awakening. Light leads to liberty and thriving.
Darkness is fear, hatred, lies, censorship, victimization and ignorance. Darkness leads to captivity and slavery.
There was a clear split in humanity during the recent years, with a path heading in each direction.
Why were/are people in the darkness about what was/is going on?
There was (and still is) a massive censorship and propaganda campaign aimed to control information and dominate the public perception of reality.
If we bring a sense of agency and self-responsibility back to we the people, we can observe that those who took the path of darkness had no desire to seek out information other than what was being spoon-fed to them. They had no drive to develop greater awareness about what was happening or to think critically for themselves when things weren’t making sense. They fell into the Golden Child Syndrome, seeking reward and often abusing other people who challenged the Official Narrative. And even when they did stumble upon the truth, they chose social belonging over the truth because they were terrified to stand alone.
In the first paragraph of the article, the author uses her 4-year old son as an example of spreading the darkness when he yelled, in April 2020, “SOCIAL DISTANCING!”, at another kid who got too close during an outdoor hiking adventure.
First of all, it’s gross that she’s using her 4-year old son’s example instead of owning something that she did, such as admitting that her son learned this behavior from observing his mother’s behavior. The author outed herself by using her son’s example, passing the burden of shame to him, while simultaneously planting a subtle virtue-signal that she made their masks herself.
The kids are not to blame here because they’re underage and the product of their parents’ conditioning at home. It’s the adults who are responsible, namely the parents, who programmed their kids to behave in such a way, whether this was done intentionally or as a result of ignorance.
We can tell a lot about the home environment when we see the issues that a child has. In fact, we can only understand what’s going on with the child by taking into account their environment.
Of course the schools also play a role in the programming and indoctrination of kids.
Additionally, it’s important to keep in mind that where there’s a split household, whether in terms of differing perceptions among the parents/caretakers, or due to a divorce or separation, the child’s behavior may reflect one parent or caretaker more than the other. Kids are often drawn to follow the example of the parent they intuit to have the power.
The author refers to behaviors like her son’s as “precautions” that “were totally misguided.” There was nothing in the article about regretting having traumatized her kid with fear. A 4-year old kid who is so terrified of other people that he screams “SOCIAL DISTANCING!” at another kid, is a traumatized kid who is traumatizing another kid. And again, it’s not the kid’s fault because he learned that from adults.
In the next paragraph, the author discloses that she’s teaching a class at Brown on COVID. Judging from her perspectives in this article, I’m wondering if the class is called, The Economics of Pandemic Gaslighting 101.
It’s interesting that she cites these early, and more benign, examples from April 2020, when most of us were still in the uncertainty and confusion about what was really happening. It’s as if her reflection on the pandemic response ends in 2020.
The author doesn’t mention, at any point in this article, the escalating atrocities that were committed later, for example in 2021, when many people were advocating for the segregation of second-class citizens who had not taken the experimental injections as well as supporting the mandates for these medical procedures. The topic of that lecture would surely need to draw the parallel to the early years of Nazi Germany when they issued the Gesundheitspaß (health pass) and started banning specific groups of people from public places like restaurants, pubs, pools, theaters, libraries, etc.
The erasing of history in this article includes the fallout this year. In September 2022, the official EU data showed a shocking 691% increase in excess deaths among children since the European Medicines Agency gave emergency authorization for the experimental injections used in kids aged 12-15.
More recently, a UK government agency, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) published new data on deaths, taking into account vaccination status. It’s bad overall, and even worse for young children and teenagers:
This means, according to the UK Governments own official data, double vaccinated children are 1422% / 15.22x more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children. Whilst triple vaccinated children are 4423% / 45.23x more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children.
Unfortunately, we see much of the same when it comes to vaccinated teenagers. What we discover from the above is that triple-vaccinated teenagers are 136% / 2.35x more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated teenagers, and 38% more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated teenagers.
The worst figures in terms of all-cause deaths are however among double-vaccinated teenagers. Official UK Government data reveals that double vaccinated teenagers, with a mortality rate of 36.17 per 100,000 person-years, are 149.3% / 2.5 x more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated teenagers with a mortality rate of 14.51 per 100,000 person-years.
Unfortunately, we see the same pattern in all other age groups.
The author of the Atlantic article completely avoids discussing these data and only highlights the school closures, “There’s an emerging consensus that schools were closed too long”. She’s right that closing schools had negative effects on the kids.
Where were all the professionals who work in child development? Why did none of them speak up, knowing what damages were being done to children with the masking, school closures and experimental injections for kids?
They didn’t speak up because they prioritized soothing their own fear over the wellbeing of the kids.
Now we have an entire generation of kids who have been traumatized. They were cognitively, neurologically and developmentally stunted, with long-term damages done, some of which may be irreparable. We have no idea how bad this is going to be for these kids as they grow up, because this kind of social experiment has never been done before in human history. However, the skyrocketing mental health crisis among kids and adolescents is already revealing the trajectory of where this is headed. The recent death count of kids is even more grave because those who are alive at least have a chance for recovery.
Does the author regret the damage to her own kid that she participated in or what is happening to children around the world as a result of disastrous public health policies?
If she had true remorse for her own participation during the last three years, she would admit that instead of hiding behind her 4-year old son. It’s interesting that she is involved in re-defining what it means to be a “good parent”.
The author claims they had “only glimmers of information” in the spring and summer of 2020. However, there were decades of research in child development before 2020. It’s hard to argue ignorance as a defense regarding the harm done to children.
Dr. Zenobia Storah, a child and adolescent clinical psychologist, speaks candidly about the pandemic response’s devastating toll on children and young people’s mental health. During a summit called, Healthcare: The Future, Dr. Storah pointed out that in 1989, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child stated:
In all actions concerning children, the best interests of the child should be a primary consideration.
(Article 3: UN Convention on the Rights of the Child)
Dr. Storah said that was the pre-pandemic culture in which she worked. It was shocking that the principles and values of early childhood development, based on decades of research and practice were being discarded in 2020. She said there was a tremendous failure of most professionals and professional bodies to advocate for children.
Dr. Storah said that part of the path to recovery involves an important reflection:
As a society, we must ask ourselves how we got to the point where we subjected our young to un-evidenced, harmful and arbitrary interventions.
I agree with Dr. Storah that it’s imperative we have these discussions in society about the harm that was done to children, so that more damage can be avoided and kids can get the support they need to start healing.
It’s not a surprise that this topic is being bypassed in the rug-sweeping campaign, especially since the CDC recently added the COVID vaccine to the childhood schedule.
The author of the Atlantic article cites the COVID vaccines only once, but not at all admitting the dangers, injuries and deaths caused by these agents to people of all ages, including myocarditis in children. She only says, “the mRNA vaccines won out”, comparing them to the J&J version. There’s a HUGE chunk of truth missing here.
She mentions nothing about bodily autonomy either, how people were forced or coerced into taking these experimental injections, including students who attend the university where she teaches as well as the employees. She completely avoids this topic, as if a female professor at an Ivy League, woke university has never heard of the concept of consent and bodily autonomy.
This paragraph seems to be her thesis supporting the proposal for pandemic amnesty:
The people who got it right, for whatever reason, may want to gloat. Those who got it wrong, for whatever reason, may feel defensive and retrench into a position that doesn’t accord with the facts. All of this gloating and defensiveness continues to gobble up a lot of social energy and to drive the culture wars, especially on the internet. These discussions are heated, unpleasant and, ultimately, unproductive. In the face of so much uncertainty, getting something right had a hefty element of luck. And, similarly, getting something wrong wasn’t a moral failing. Treating pandemic choices as a scorecard on which some people racked up more points than others is preventing us from moving forward.
Most of the people who were right don’t want to gloat. We want the truth to be acknowledged and admitted, explicitly. We want accountability and we want an end to the destruction.
She also suggests that being on the right side of this thing was about luck. It wasn’t luck. It was about looking at evidence, doing independent research, then applying critical thinking with the rational brain. Ironically, she fancies herself as a “data-driven” economist.
She also writes that getting it wrong wasn’t a moral failing. It was, indeed, a grave moral failing to force or coerce people into taking experimental injections and discarding their human right to bodily autonomy. While there were many transgressions during the pandemic response, this is the key moral offense that she conveniently avoids mentioning.
This whole article is disgusting but that paragraph is particularly evil, revealing that those who advocate for amnesty at this point aren’t sorry at all for their participation in evil. They aren’t owning any real accountability. They just want us to forget what they did and ignore what is continuing to happen.
In my experience dealing with abusers in my own life and coaching survivors of abuse, this is often what the covert types do in order to trick the target into thinking that the abuser (or enabler, in this case) is admitting to wrongdoing.
When a person won’t explicitly own responsibility for their specific actions, they’ll often use vague words eluding to responsibility or an apology, in order to make the target assume that the abuser actually has remorse.
Sometimes it kind of sounds like an apology, but it’s not. If you read carefully, there’s no apology in this entire article and there’s no true remorse. It’s just a gaslighting piece to sweep it all under the rug, to look good and move on like it never happened.
When a person can’t admit responsibility for their actions, it means they don’t think they did anything wrong and they will do it again.
She tops that paragraph off with a cherry, saying that this discussion on who was right and wrong is preventing us from moving forward. That’s like when an abuser in a relationship blames you because you keep bringing up the past. Yet you’re trying to talk about what happened because nothing was actually resolved, therefore trust cannot be repaired and the relationship cannot be reconciled.
Later she writes, “moving on is crucial now”. If you’ve been through an abusive relationship, you know that you can’t simply move on afterward. You don’t just let it go. There’s a lot of trauma to process and that takes time. Each individual’s process is on their own timeline. It’s toxic to try to rush another person’s healing process.
The first and foundational steps in trauma healing are truth and safety.
One cannot even start to move forward through the steps of the healing process (or reconciling a relationship) when the truth is still being actively circumnavigated, ignored and otherwise covered in gaslighting. People can’t possibly feel safe when no admission of guilt or change in action is happening around the abuse of consent and bodily autonomy.
The author then refers to some of the problems caused by school closures that need to be addressed, but what’s interesting is that her focus is on student test scores. Performance is only one issue that kids are struggling with now, and from my perspective, test scores are one of the least concerning. In fact, the focus on test scores sounds like giving more importance to appearances and image rather than wellbeing.
A covert manipulator parent pretends to care about their children’s wellbeing but, when you look carefully at the words they use, and especially observe their actions, you can notice that their focus is actually on image and appearances, which have nothing to do with the child’s wellbeing.
Toward the end of the article, she mentions that some people have neglected their healthcare during the last three years. This sounds like a subtle blaming of people. While each individual has the responsibility of managing their own health, she doesn’t mention that the fear campaign as well as the public health recommendations and mandates contributed to this problem, in most cases advising people to do the very opposite of what’s healthy.
And of course, in the second to last paragraph, she can’t miss the opportunity to add a PR campaign for vaccines. She says routine vaccine rates for children are down lately. It also sounds like a dog-whistle, championing the recent CDC recommendation for kids to take the COVID vaccine, without directly saying it.
Rather than debating the role that messaging about COVID vaccines had in this decline, we need to put all our energy into bringing these rates back up. Pediatricians and public-health officials will need to work together on community outreach, and politicians will need to consider school mandates.
“Rather than debating the role that messaging about COVID vaccines had” is directly saying that we should not speak of the emotional manipulation in the messaging. Instead she wants us to focus our energy on broad buy-in on the vaccines, which is precisely the objective of the emotional manipulation in the messaging.
The author’s messaging is not only to rug-sweep the grave abuses of human rights and transgressions committed by the psychopaths and their enablers, wiping their slate clean of responsibility so we can all just move on.
She has, in a sophisticated fashion, driven this entire article toward the punchline of more vaccine mandates, for children.
Many parents, awakened after the recent years, are now questioning the absurd amount of “normal” vaccinations on the CDC childhood schedule nowadays. If you’re a parent trying to empower yourself in this battle and wanting to know more about the risks and your rights, Childrens’ Health Defense is a top resource.
Zero Hedge had a great rebuttal to the Atlantic article and quoted several public reactions to the gaslighting contained within. The Zero Hedge article also cited the Rasmussen survey of January 2022. These shocking statistics reveal it’s clear who the fascists are.
We are expected to just forget this happened and pretend we didn’t see people’s true colors?
That survey reveals that, like a racist who confidently and openly speaks racial slurs in the presence of other racists, when fascist perspectives are condoned and supported in the media, promoted on social media and by corporations, institutions and figures of authority in society, the fascist-minded among the citizens feel free to speak their mind as well.
We would be foolish to pretend this didn’t happen.
It’s not surprising that the let’s just forget what happened gaslighting campaign is coming from an Ivy representative. Ivy League used to mean something. Nowadays it means nothing more than an overpriced, leading indoctrination institution that spearheads victimization through woke activism and demoralization via neo-Marxist propaganda, all of which serves to divide and conquer the people. They are on the frontlines of the culture war that the Brown professor recommends we avoid through any further discussion about right and wrong regarding the pandemic response.
From Brown’s own webpage, we can see they’re still forcing the experimental injections that have now clearly been proven to be neither safe nor effective:
In a refreshing perspective, Arizona Gubernatorial candidate, Kari Lake called for investigations into the COVID crimes:
Most of the people who advocated for such measures and condoned the psychopathic treatment of their fellow citizens haven’t learned anything. The exception would be those who authentically repented and specifically apologized for participating in evil. That’s forgivable and, in many cases, it’s a person worthy of re-friending. Many of them learned the hard way and woke up after a serious injury caused by the injections.
Erasing reality and rewriting history with no accountability whatsoever is not something we should forget because it means they’re going to do it again.
Those who haven’t admitted responsibility for their participation in evil are one propaganda campaign away from jumping right back into lockstep. Their minds have already been primed and conditioned by the first round.
This is why abusers love to go back to old targets since they don’t have to invest so much energy in grooming and brainwashing a new prey. All they have to do is use specific trigger words that activate the old programming (ie: “safe and effective” or “we are all in this together”). Sooner or later, every abuse victim has to come to terms with their own enabling of evil, for their participation in the abuse dynamic. Self-responsibility is the only path to true empowerment and liberation.
People who haven’t authentically repented for their wrongful actions during the last three years, whether the leaders driving the narrative or their enablers in society, haven’t had change of heart. They might feel ashamed or embarrassed that they were wrong, but not necessarily for what they did, and this is an important distinction. As this article suggests, they expect us to forget about it so they don’t have to feel the uncomfortable feelings. They’d prefer we all just sweep it under the rug so they can feel more comfortable about what they did and continue doing more of the same.
If we allow the atrocities of the last three years to be swept under the rug, history will repeat itself and it will be much worse next time. That would be a grave error.
As it almost always happens in abusive relationships, the survivor doesn’t get an apology from the abuser. The overt types are too grandiose to issue apologies. The covert types however are much more tricky. They often say words that sound like an apology. This is just another form of love-bombing and gaslighting to erase history and absolve themselves of any responsibility. It often causes the target to forgive the abuser and reconcile, remaining in the abusive relationship.
The abuse cycle repeats until the survivor finally breaks free, realizing they cannot keep hoping for that admission of truth in order to start healing.
Since the survivor cannot get the truth directly from the abuser or their enablers, the survivor can only turn to awareness as a source of truth. That’s when the survivor discovers information about narcissists and other abusers, and learns how the psychological abuse cycle works. The truth is found in a combination of external resources of information along with the survivor’s own emerging awareness and self-trust, all of which provides an important part of the foundation for the rest of the healing process.
I think we may be faced with this same survivors’ dilemma in society now.
We can keep hoping they’re going to admit to the wrongdoings, the lies, the abuse, the misleading and manipulation of statistics, the injuries and deaths, all the little tricks and sleight of hands games they played us with… and we could be waiting a lifetime, like a person trapped in the same dynamic of an abusive relationship.
Alternatively, we can continue on the path of light, seeking truth through information and evidence that keeps surfacing here and there every day. We can talk to each other about our experiences, discoveries and insights. And ultimately, we can restore our self-trust without holding out for the abusers or their enablers to validate what we already know to be true.
Don’t let the gaslighters pressure you into forgetting what happened.
Fauci gave his best Brooklyn “Fuhgetaboutit” on a recent skit where Colbert walked with him to get a booster. He is still quadrupling down on the messaging, acting like people aren’t getting injured and dying, and pretending that these shots are actually effective. This is a more overt version of rug-sweeping. Colbert is deeply complicit for making this all a joke during the last few years, and he’s still playing the role of useful idiot.
We must remember what happened if we don’t want to let this happen again.
Speak the truth, seek information and remember what happened so you can learn from it. Listen carefully to what people are saying as well as watching their actions, which say so much more than their words. Forgiveness will come in due time, if nothing else, for our own inner peace and healing. Forgiveness is not the same as reconciling relationships with abusers and unrepentant enablers, and it also doesn’t mean forgetting what happened.
Oster’s claim of gloating is a gross projection, an indicative trait of the narcissistic personality.
I struggle to maintain scant hope of the majority ever learning the truth of the past 3 years, yet were that point to ever come, I’m confident I’ll feel nothing but an overwhelming sense of relief, tinged with a deep regret that it did not come sooner.
It is dishonest enough for Oster to claim this tipping point has already been reached, without making such a contrary, subhuman, claim as to our reaction.
Thank goodness you can see through all of this Meredith. Out of a handful of Narcissistic Abuse 'experts' who I was following, before all this madness kicked off, you are the only one who has the guts to speak out. I can't work out whether they are too afraid to speak out or if they are actually taken in by it all - which is kind of worrying! Thank you Meredith - people like you help to keep me sane. :)