72 Comments

With admirable open-mindedness and courtesy, you give these authors the assumption of sincerity, the respect, and the reasoned response that they denied to you. Let's continue to take the high road, confident that the facts are on our side and that truth must always prevail in the long run.

At the same time, I can't help wishing for some James O'Keefe type to dig into these authors' backgrounds and show us that they are taking money from Pfizer or Project Mockingbird.

Expand full comment

Thanks Josh. It was admittedly a challenge to remain courteous. They did a hatchet job on me in 2021, misinterpreting my positions and calling into question my integrity as a physician while refusing to have an open conversation.

I believe we can safely say that they are on the take, at least indirectly. Getting coverage from legacy media, beneficiaries of Pfizer's generosity, is a pretty big paycheck in this time where coverage and a following is the currency.

Expand full comment

I wonder, if these "experts" in cults etc will deny hunger as well as heart attacks?

Will they just die in their homes, too ashamed of their failure to admit failure?

Unfortunately the currency is dead, they know it deep in their subconscious dumps.

I am no less worried by good people living a lie than genuine psychopaths.

I recently had the unfortunate opportunity to watch children being boosted at my local doctors surgery. Ironically I was in there to get blood tests for poisoning... My hair had rapidly fallen out from what I think is boric acid poisoning of my rainwater tank. There is a local psychopath that poisoned his wife with coolant, and is likely vandalizing my farm machinery, that I have confronted recently...so I'm a bit suspicious.

The weaponizing of care/ empathy, has led to good people unknowingly killing anyone. These people are scarier than actual psychopaths because they have they are backed by ALL of the government departments.

We just have to wait this one out....

Expand full comment

Great piece, Madhava! You covered a lot of territory and probed some edges. I very much appreciate you ended with a conversation with Charles Eisenstein who, when you/we are trying to land somewhere where we can stand upright and make some sense and find some human connection, reminded us how systems work. The three authors would be called useful idiots by some. Eisenstein calls attention to the fact that groups need opinion shapers - those who can filter and refine and stay in a lane of consensus. I would wager we all inhabit spaces like this, so it is really a matter of when and where can we/some of us be contrarian. Does the system protect free speech? Does the social coterie tolerate dissension? So we have here three victims of cults (as they see it) who are now liberated and knowing, but like a set of Russian dolls, are still held hostage. They can't see that they are still hostages.

Ultimately, whether they "see" or don't see is not a matter of education or credentials or "chops", it is maintaining a "safe space" worldview. You buried a lede... "Derek Beres is listed as an 'agenda contributor' to the World Economic Forum". Whoa! Say no more. He's bought, sold, and delivered.

I doubt my education level is greater than any of the three authors when it comes to science, medicine, statistics, etc. I don't have any "chops" beyond a good education and an inquiring mind and perhaps a disposition to analysis and criticism. For me the challenge is to override my tendency to criticism and remember to engage with compassion. Thanks for reminding me!!

Expand full comment

Thank you, Sam. I did consider mentioning Derek Beres' affiliation with the WEF up front. However I would be falling into the same trap which they are in: dismissing someone's argument because of their association with a certain group or institution.

The deficiency in their position is that their research into opposing opinion is demonstrably thin, probably going no further than a google search or citation from a so-called fact-check site. It isn't necessarily because one of them writes for the WEF.

I agree that it is sometimes difficult to engage with compassion, especially when faced with groups who have gaslighted you.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 16
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Right on, reante! You sussed me out. I earned my degree in 1975 in cultural anthropology. It's a while back there and the fog of memory and the interruption of life experience gets me turned around sometimes. Do you remember Clifford Geertz' descriptions of ideology, world view, and ethos. I loved reading him. I have read your comments a couple of times and will work it over more, as it is dense. Do you also remember reading the literature and commentary on the use by Stalinists, Maoists, Francoists, etc. where they always used perjorative terms like "running dogs"? I have been shocked and dismayed to see that usage come back into vogue and for that to be right here in the good ole US. I thought I was reading Darkness At Noon so that it wouldn't happen here and again. Was I wrong! You offer a wonderful hope that after this collapse we will rebuild as the tide washes back and we maximize human freedom and potential. I hope you are right! I think you might be cause I can read the history of immediate post WWII and marvel at how so many so traumatized got a lot right in the rebuilding. Not everything, of course - we are human. Thanks for commenting on my comment!

Expand full comment

Thank you for your patient and thorough, mature, wise, aikido-like tactics in dealing with these stupid fucking idiots. i could never, and glad you did. hope this gets a wide readership.

Expand full comment

You're welcome. And, the authors are far from stupid. They do a masterful job making a convincing argument for those who are like them, ill-equipped to to arrive at sound conclusions while remaining oblivious to that fact.

In any case, these three are only expressing a way of making sense which we must grapple with. Part of their strategy is to make things personal. It's a trap

Expand full comment

Thank you for saying what I thought but wouldn’t say, as I, like our esteemed author seek to stay professional in writing. But I had a run-in with one of those cultists early on. It was soon after their podcast came out and I felt bad that the cultist who had exposed spiritual cults was so ill-informed on this subject. I respectfully sent him a very long and organized list of resources and research for him to quickly see he was responding from ignorance. His feeble but vehement defense of “public health” was his fancy way of saying conformity was his desperate demand. Despite my respectful and supportive email, he swiftly lashed out and told me to never contact him again. It was shocking to see what an infantile hypocrite he actually is as he casts projections on people who question the narrative while refusing to look at facts. In his warped mind, only he is capable of questioning and when he says it’s not allowed, he must silence those who do.

Expand full comment

"A useful idiot is a person perceived as propagandizing for a cause—particularly a bad cause originating from a devious, ruthless source—without fully comprehending the cause's goals, and who is cynically being used by the cause's leaders."

Expand full comment

You took the words right out of my mouth! 🤣

Expand full comment

Interesting that after the experience in being a part & then leaving a cult just ends up with them seeking & joining a larger & more sophisticated cult. I witnessed my sister go through the same thing. She went from being a Dead head follower, to joining a religious cloister where she was destined to live a life behind bars, to finally settling on being a strict orthodox Catholic. I’m not disparaging Catholics (as I am one), but reducing a faith to the religions most ardent & ritualistic aspects looks cult like (even to my devout mother who had 8 children). There is a desire for wanting to know your identity & one’s place in the world. People prone to cults short circuit this difficult journey of life with an immediate fix. If they leave one because they’ve overcome their trappings, they just move on to a more sophisticated & acceptable one. People who recognize the behemoth cult that is our government, institutions, & unknown bad actors are regularly questioning everything they see & hear. They’re able to survive in the uncomfortable & unacceptable because you can’t unsee the truth once you’ve accepted the truth. Many people will never be able to handle this (strangely similar to the Matrix).

Expand full comment

It seems that cults can be so large that they remain invisible.

Expand full comment

Excellent point - if it’s large enough the detractors can be disparaged as being in a cult. Might makes right rather than right makes might.

Expand full comment

The search for truth is found through acts of compassion.

Expand full comment

Beautiful.

Expand full comment

"It will be our level of humanity and temperament that will set us apart and ultimately make a difference." A thousand times yes to this. Indeed, I am seeing this happen already in my life. I was recently invited to join a neighborhood yoga class being offered in the instructor's home. After exchanging a few emails to learn more about the class, what time it was meeting, and how much it cost, the instructor also added that everyone "must be fully vaccinated and boosted." At that point I had a choice. How would I respond? Would I attempt to "educate" her and explain that it made no sense to require vaccination when everyone is getting Covid regardless of jab status? Would I simply ghost her, or politely decline to attend with no further explanation? Or would I offer her compassion and respond from that place. I chose the latter and the result was that I felt a little crack form in her defense shield. Will she awaken from and leave the cult? Probably not. But I definitely provided a different possibility for her, which I would like to think could be useful to her in dark times. Thank you, Madhava, for continuing to share your experiences and perspectives during these challenging times. I greatly appreciate your voice, which combines thorough and thoughtful analysis with openness, humility and compassion. Few, except maybe Charles, are doing this. (And I find your writing is much easier to read.)

Expand full comment

Thanks Anne. Please share how you responded with compassion. What did you say?

Expand full comment

Good post. Evil is in a nutshell anything that strives to turn life on its head, to destroy it. Vaccine criticism (what is there not to criticize?) being labeled "anti-vax" seems like a combination of propaganda and the total and utter destruction of critical thinking in the name of an ideology, and a destructive one (evil) at that.

Expand full comment

Precisely

Expand full comment

Madhava, wow, what a great piece: thorough, insightful and void of the ridicule and ad hominem attacks that are the bread and butter of the Conspirituality podcasters. An impressive critique. Your humanity and grace are impressive too, in rising above attacks. I love your understanding that they have jumped from one cult to another--the pseudoscientific cult of covid orthodoxy. The solidity of their arguments is reminiscent of ‘Turtles all the Way Down’,. They aren’t interested in the truth or critical analysis. They take the covid orthodoxy as truth and look no further, it’s clearly turtles all the way down. As you point out, theirs is a faith based stance. To me that’s their fatal flaw. Being interested in the truth and being willing to listen to dissenting arguments gets one to a different point than being committed to defending ones cult. Great piece. Way to make great arguments and rise above the personal attacks! Bravo!

Expand full comment

Thank you Doug. I don't believe the authors are ill-intending. Rather, they fall into the group of people who don't know what they don't know. There are certainly many like them out there but these folks have an audience and they are probably unaware that they are being used by a very powerful cult themselves.

Expand full comment

This is maybe the most important read exploring the last 3 years I've seen. PLEASE someone get this to the author (new age - cults - spirituality - futurism, -neuroscience) Jamie Wheal, who would MAYBE help blow this up. I haven't been able to keep up with his blog lately, but perhaps he still sits the fence, professing a highly objective persona.

Daniel Pinchbeck in my opinion is owned, and literally can't see and write reality. He is in fact a "Reality Bender".

The other important group I noticed entering the Conspirituality realm / racket are those brilliant ones that released the Logical Fallacies and Critical Thinking posters. "School of Creative Thought", I believe. And I DID like their earlier stuff. Their recent launch begs for your attention. Metaconspiracy.org and theconspiracytest.org Platforms for "scrutinizing conspiracy theories". And pulling the kinds grand manipulation obfuscation stunts the three in your article regularly do.

Exposing these "high intellectual systems" like you did here actually sounds like the most potent thing going on in journalism. And the most promising to bring truth to power in a lightning round.

Expand full comment

Thanks for linking in those platforms. I would also be curious to know how the Conspirituality authors would respond to this critique...

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 19Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I totally agree, but as a species, do we got that kind of time? Its like we need some new advanced technology to penetrate illusion with truther beams, lol. I appreciate the reality check.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 19Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I personally don't believe that would have been the primary purpose, merely a top side benefit to a forward direction towards much more. I get into the weird stuff though, and don't blame those not into those realms.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 19
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

The occult forces = evil, and behind global decision making is a structural analysis. Albeit not a serious analysis for the game board on what you are speaking about. But for now its an pertinent board and the important one to open the masses up into the conversation. I fault nobody for looking away at a trainwreck, and chasing down trainwrecks is a good example of YMMV. I can simultaneously and completely appreciate your view. The movie "Collapse" was my first serious entry point into pulling apart the great narratives. Now I'm more interested in the hyper dimensional and the occulted secrets of history. Not for the faint of heart, not for the overwhelmed.

Expand full comment

Yes, wonderful work Madhava Setty. This was a clarifying read.

"This is why Eisenstein believes it is vital to engage with compassion and not contempt. If measurable quantities can be thrown into databases and run through algorithms that churn out results which feed a narrative that may have only a tenuous connection to objective fact, it will be our level of humanity and temperament that will set us apart and ultimately make a difference."

It arises in me, when I ponder that quote, my focus WANTS/Almost DANCES to be on creating a beautiful reality that draws people in and let this reality become archaic, not because of some fight someone wins and because (roll modeled) peace and justice and respect/trust and non judgement feel so darn good.

Let us turn our attention TOWARD the beauty, then

Expand full comment

Thank you for the deep share, Sandra. I am 100% with you.

It's a big step to dissolve the anger we have for those with whom we disagree with. Perhaps we can begin by questioning why we get mad at those with whom we agree but who are not angry at the other side.

Engaging with contempt certainly won't speed things along. I would suggest that those who choose to stay compassionate have a better understanding of how big a problem we really have.

Expand full comment

Ah thank you again for your strings of thoughts and words. BTW, Eisenstein lost about half of his readership during the covid episode. I do not believe he raked in the dough... I remember seeing a quote/meme that said “You listen to folks who are paid to say what they’re are saying; I listen to folks who have or are willing to lose everything for saying what they are saying; you and i are not the same.” Thank you Madhava (hey, first name basis, feels like I know you!) for your willingness to “truthspeak” as Mattias Desmet would say. A deep bow, a profound gratitude coming your way. Humanity gets to stand straight thanks to amazing examples like yourself (and myself, in my own humble way).

Expand full comment

I do appreciate the kind words and acknowledgement, Valerie. Those words on the meme are brilliant. Charles mentioned that he was surprised that people began attacking him for saying things he had been saying for quite some time.

Expand full comment

More on same topic (conflicts of interest in the alt narrative sector?) https://vigilantnews.com/post/proper-systematic-review-meta-analysis-of-mainstream-vaccine-literature/

Expand full comment

Bravo, well-articulated, insightful and thorough, thank you.

Expand full comment

Anyone with a brain cell these days knows that the biggest health threat isn't coming from where, according to the title, these authors think it is. I have one word for this book: Bah.

Expand full comment

This only what we truthseekers and peace promoters can expect. Signals of virtue and righteousness and doubling down about the antinarrative dissidents being demonized like Jews in Munich in 1938. See the pattern of history repeat?

If any of their BS was true, the unjabbed would be dying. Including me. They don't enjoy the fact they are in a cull of their own weak woke making.

Expand full comment

One thing I’ve been noticing for quite some time is the mocking tone that the anti anti-vaxxers interject into every argument which always seems to begin by comparing those who raise honest and sincere questions with “flat-earthers” and any other conspiracy theorists they can conveniently point to.

But what makes this all so ironic is the fact that conventional mainstream beliefs claiming the earth is flat were considered undeniable until a conspiracy theorist named Galileo came on the scene with his crazy ideology that the earth is round. If you believe in reincarnation or in the principle that what goes around comes around, envision those boasting today to be the embodiment of science and attacking dissenters were the ones standing on the other side. In their eyes it was those “round-earthers” who were the problem.

Expand full comment

You are quite right about the tone. I believe this is part of their strategy, to make differences personal and not just conceptual. Once it gets personal there's no way for a real discussion and sharing to occur. That's their way of hiding behind an argument that they probably know, at some level, is entirely faith-based.

To my understanding, Galileo was one of the more prominent voices to put forth the idea of heliocentrism, not round-eartherism. But your point is spot on. The papacy was very intent to make sure people didn't wake up to the fact that the Earth wasn't the center of creation, or even more dangerous to their power, the wide acceptance of their own fallibility.

Sadly, the astronomer with unmatched bonafides died under house arrest because he would not recant his very true, substantiated conclusions.

Expand full comment

"Nevertheless, the book is very well written."

I am reminded of Camus's great volley from The Fall. "I am well aware that an addiction to silk underwear does not necessarily imply one's feet are dirty. Nevertheless, style, like sheer silk, too often hides eczema. Why yes, let's have another gin!"

I see a live public debate in our future, Madhava...

Expand full comment

I actually do believe it is well written, much like an advertisement for Mountain Dew. It appeals to their target audience, hungry for caffeine and sugar in a fluorescent hue.

Expand full comment

a debate with these three; not between us...

Expand full comment

There's no way they would ever agree to a "debate". They have made that abundantly clear to me in the past, on more than one occasion.

Expand full comment

All we can do is challenge them. Good on you for doing that. Then we have to move on and try to find someone who will agree to discuss/debate these important topics. In 2021, I challenged 16 pediatricians in the Jacksonville, FL area who had publicly supported childhood vaccine mandates (including the medical director of a huge pediatric hospital system, Wolfson Children's, to a live debate at the San Marco theater in Jax. All declined. I have recently challenged Paul Offit to a debate over two incorrect claims he made re the origin of the virus and the number killed from Covid. He has not responded. Dr. Hotez refused to debate RFK, Jr. , a candidate for President of the U.S., on a topic within Dr. Hotez's specialty (with a 2.5 million dollar incentive contributed by private individuals, mind you). There can't be too many reasons for that. Hotez and Offit are cowards? Sure. But it goes well beyond that. Keep up the great work, Dr. Setty.

Expand full comment