A couple of days ago, the inimitable Igor Chudov started an effort to organize his readers into a brainstorming workshop to try to figure out how to convince or at least plant seeds of doubt in the minds of supporters of the mainstream COVID narrative, especially with respect to the vaccination program.
It is very hard to do but I’m practising using David’s techniques and getting better at it. Burying people in data definitely does not work! You have to get the other person talking and questioning their own knowledge and belief. You have to get past their emotional attachment to their belief in the vaccines and get them to tell you the factual information they are relying on. Ask them gentle, non-threatening questions. Do you think the vaccines are effective? How effective do you think they are? What are you basing that on? Why do you think we need mandates? If the vaccine protects you and anyone else who chooses to be vaccinated, why must others be forced to be vaccinated when they have concerns? Would you want to be forced to have a medical treatment you didn’t think was safe? If the vaccine DOESN’T protect you why do you or anyone need to be forcibly vaccinated? Why shouldn’t it be a choice? Do you think the vaccines are 100% safe? How safe do you think they are? These are just sample questions I have used. You have to be very calm, gentle and patient in having the discussion. Don’t be tempted to jump in too soon or answer your own questions. Let them find the answers. It’s powerful to watch when it happens 😊
I want to throw “Non Violent Communication” in the tool bag. It also stems from the fact that behind every argument, there is an unmet need. Thank you for sharing your resources.
Hands down, the best persuasion I have read is the essay "Needle Points" by Norman Doidge in Tablet magazine. He does a fantastic job of getting the reader (pro or anti) to open up mentally, before softly, delicately and thoroughly eviscerating the trustworthiness of the pharmaceutical companies. I've actually had a vaxxed friend contact me on their own after reading that essay. A masterwork of persuasion.
One way I've had success as a US expat is by comparing the response there to my current country of residence. For example sitting around the lunch table at work, someone made some comments about the crazy anti-vaxxers in America. Then I made my argument like this:
1. My neighbor got a stroke from the Astra Zeneca vaccine
2. The national government here was paying attention to the side effects, and ended up pulling AZ from the market as the dangers of strokes and blood clots became more apparent. This increased trust locally that the health authorities were paying attention.
3. In the US, the health authorities refuse to acknowledge that there are any potential side effects, they just keep on insisting that they're totally safe (this was last year).
4. When people know they're being lied to, it's easy for them to become conspiracy theorists.
Obviously this approach doesn't bring a person to go full antivax, but it does do a couple things that I see as very important:
1. Acknowledgement that severe side effects are a real thing (confirmed by personal experience and government officials, but soften the blow by praising their home country)
2. Plants a thought that maybe those crazy conspiracy theorists at least have a bit of legitimacy to their complaints and that government corruption is real.
Hey, I'm speaking at the June 28 VRBPAC meeting. Any chance you could forward me a copy of the recent FOIA you got back from the CDC for use on one of the slides? If it's not doable by tomorrow morning don't worry about it; the slide deck is due tomorrow afternoon. Sorry for the short notice (they just got back to us yesterday)
Thanks David. I have tried to do that too - opening with a comment like “we’re on the same side - I just want people to be healthy and safe” or something similar. I also try very hard to make my questions less direct and more gently probing but it really does go against my nature as I’m a lawyer and we’re trained to be direct and get to the point quickly! But I am practising what you suggested in your video with Dr Tess Lawrie and finding people are more willing to at least engage in a conversation with me if I don’t just barrage them with a load of what I think is totally obvious, compelling and damning data which was my previous entirely unsuccessful approach! Having watched your video with Tess I now completely understand why that would never work!
How wonderful if the medical fascists had tried this gentle, non-threatening approach instead of bribery, shaming, coercion, punishment, fines, and calls for imprisonment. I am too angry to lead the sheep to the water of truth without wanting to drown them in it.
I don't really see that - what I see is a desire to be seen as correct, even more than to convince others. Every attempt to reach others has to begin with listening to the other person. Are you really up for that?
It is very hard to do but I’m practising using David’s techniques and getting better at it. Burying people in data definitely does not work! You have to get the other person talking and questioning their own knowledge and belief. You have to get past their emotional attachment to their belief in the vaccines and get them to tell you the factual information they are relying on. Ask them gentle, non-threatening questions. Do you think the vaccines are effective? How effective do you think they are? What are you basing that on? Why do you think we need mandates? If the vaccine protects you and anyone else who chooses to be vaccinated, why must others be forced to be vaccinated when they have concerns? Would you want to be forced to have a medical treatment you didn’t think was safe? If the vaccine DOESN’T protect you why do you or anyone need to be forcibly vaccinated? Why shouldn’t it be a choice? Do you think the vaccines are 100% safe? How safe do you think they are? These are just sample questions I have used. You have to be very calm, gentle and patient in having the discussion. Don’t be tempted to jump in too soon or answer your own questions. Let them find the answers. It’s powerful to watch when it happens 😊
Great post! Added to my pinned reply. I will write another article with a summary of findings.
This is exactly what we need. Thank you so much Josh
Successfully communicating a counter narrative is a real challenge, easily bungled. Just citing facts and data will most likely fail miserably.
Josh - this is great. Will spend some time at this site.
Great resource! Thank you!
I want to throw “Non Violent Communication” in the tool bag. It also stems from the fact that behind every argument, there is an unmet need. Thank you for sharing your resources.
Hands down, the best persuasion I have read is the essay "Needle Points" by Norman Doidge in Tablet magazine. He does a fantastic job of getting the reader (pro or anti) to open up mentally, before softly, delicately and thoroughly eviscerating the trustworthiness of the pharmaceutical companies. I've actually had a vaxxed friend contact me on their own after reading that essay. A masterwork of persuasion.
One way I've had success as a US expat is by comparing the response there to my current country of residence. For example sitting around the lunch table at work, someone made some comments about the crazy anti-vaxxers in America. Then I made my argument like this:
1. My neighbor got a stroke from the Astra Zeneca vaccine
2. The national government here was paying attention to the side effects, and ended up pulling AZ from the market as the dangers of strokes and blood clots became more apparent. This increased trust locally that the health authorities were paying attention.
3. In the US, the health authorities refuse to acknowledge that there are any potential side effects, they just keep on insisting that they're totally safe (this was last year).
4. When people know they're being lied to, it's easy for them to become conspiracy theorists.
Obviously this approach doesn't bring a person to go full antivax, but it does do a couple things that I see as very important:
1. Acknowledgement that severe side effects are a real thing (confirmed by personal experience and government officials, but soften the blow by praising their home country)
2. Plants a thought that maybe those crazy conspiracy theorists at least have a bit of legitimacy to their complaints and that government corruption is real.
Hey, I'm speaking at the June 28 VRBPAC meeting. Any chance you could forward me a copy of the recent FOIA you got back from the CDC for use on one of the slides? If it's not doable by tomorrow morning don't worry about it; the slide deck is due tomorrow afternoon. Sorry for the short notice (they just got back to us yesterday)
Thanks David. I have tried to do that too - opening with a comment like “we’re on the same side - I just want people to be healthy and safe” or something similar. I also try very hard to make my questions less direct and more gently probing but it really does go against my nature as I’m a lawyer and we’re trained to be direct and get to the point quickly! But I am practising what you suggested in your video with Dr Tess Lawrie and finding people are more willing to at least engage in a conversation with me if I don’t just barrage them with a load of what I think is totally obvious, compelling and damning data which was my previous entirely unsuccessful approach! Having watched your video with Tess I now completely understand why that would never work!
How wonderful if the medical fascists had tried this gentle, non-threatening approach instead of bribery, shaming, coercion, punishment, fines, and calls for imprisonment. I am too angry to lead the sheep to the water of truth without wanting to drown them in it.
'Reaching across the divide' is a great thing.
I don't really see that - what I see is a desire to be seen as correct, even more than to convince others. Every attempt to reach others has to begin with listening to the other person. Are you really up for that?
Oh wow, thank you. I can't say I'll wade through all the available vids on thst site,but I'm always grateful for provided ways for positive growth.
My stack if 'Stacks is making me selectively edit who geys attention on what dday... and this is a attention worthy time-sink.