The Motherf*ckin' Hegelian Dialectic
The initial narrative is a lie. The oppositional position is also a lie. Why? Because it works again and again and again and.... Learn Thesis then Antithesis to see past this game.
The Hegelian Dialectic as explained by Google Search AI-
The Hegelian dialectic is a philosophical method where opposing ideas (thesis and antithesis) clash and are then resolved into a higher, more comprehensive understanding (synthesis). This process, according to Hegel, drives the development of understanding and reality.
Key Concepts:
Thesis: A proposition, idea, or position that is initially accepted as true.
Antithesis: A proposition, idea, or position that contradicts or opposes the thesis.
Synthesis: A new proposition, idea, or position that arises from the resolution of the conflict between the thesis and antithesis, incorporating elements of both and reaching a higher level of truth or understanding.
How it Works:
Initial Thesis: A starting point or assumption about something.
Emergence of Antithesis: A counter-argument or opposing idea arises, challenging the initial thesis.
Resolution through Synthesis: The tension between the thesis and antithesis is resolved through a new concept or idea that incorporates aspects of both, leading to a more complete and nuanced understanding.
How it works in Politics and World News-
In the political Hegelian Dialectic- the powers that be create both the thesis and the antithesis prior to initiating the dialectic. By controlling the circumstances and conditions creating a scenario, along with manufacturing and presenting the two oppositional perspectives that will become the narrative of the scenario, they hope to control the outcome of the scenario.
How does this look in the real world? Well, here you go, after 5 years, the antithesis has now become the purported truth of the situation.
But what is the truth?
Not only was the Zoonotic Origin theory a lie, so is the Lab Leak theory.
The truth of the situation will not be found within the two faces of the Covid Origin dialectic. In order to find the truth of the situation, one must only look to what has not been proven with evidence.
The Sars-Cov-2 virus has never been physically isolated.1
Therefore no testing regimen could possibly have been created.2
Therefore no viral pandemic could be legitimately declared.3
The narrative based and scientifically fraudulent RT-PCR test is alleged (within the narrative) to require 3 proteins, each known to exist within either the nucleocapsid or the spike protein of the virus and each must be unique to the virus, in order to determine whether or not a person is infected with the virus. We know that this process can not possibly determine if a person is ill, but even within the narrative, sans isolation, there can be no determination of 3 unique proteins.
Why? Because without isolation, there is no way to find out what proteins make up the virus.
The key to unlocking the Covid Dialectic- “In Silico”
The evidence presented within the narrative has all been determined in Silico. In silico is a purposeful obfuscation wherein Latin has been used to lend a false legitimacy to the term “in computer simulation’. That is all in silico means. It means literally in silicone, such as the micro processing boards of a computer.
Computers can do a bang up job of simulating well understood events, but they fail utterly when forced to extrapolate unknown circumstances and conditions of a simulated scenario. They can not discover anything new because they are subject to the inherent inadequacies of the GIGO principle. Garbage In = Garbage Out. Any computer modeling that predicts events based on unknown or poorly understood causes will fail to predict the reality of any given situation. They simply can not be relied on due to the overriding GIGO errors.
Therefore modeling and predictions based on in silico evidence are completely worthless and most definitely should never be relied on to justify any changes in policy, either governmental and personal. If someone is suggesting any alteration to laws, customs, or policies based on unprecedented threats using in silico evidence or predictive programming, they are lying to you for some reason. The lie can be logically proven without needing any evidence other than the spokesperson’s presentation. They chose their evidence and their methodology for a reason and that reason can not be justified or truthful.
The important take away from this-
Keep this in mind, always: Whenever presented with either the thesis or the antithesis of a Hegelian Dialectic in political announcements or world news media look at the evidentiary base being given for whatever changes the news or politician is hoping to enact. If the evidence was found in silico or by using predictive programming and no other evidence exists supporting their position, then you are being lied to and have sufficient evidence to put a stop to the fraudulent activities of the presenters. You do not need any more evidence to prove their intent.
Go get ‘em!
https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001017
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7454076/
https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/covid-19-public-health-emergency-of-international-concern-(pheic)-global-research-and-innovation-forum