About those Vaccine Passports

We live in a world where doublespeak has become the norm. What's said out loud is rarely meant literally. The real meaning becomes apparent in retrospect, either through actions taken or through logical analysis. 

• "To live with the disease" = "To live with the vaccine"
• "To be vaccinated" = "To have a vaccine passport"

This type of doublespeak is not the sole domain of politicians. Laymen engage in it too. When my brother asked if I was vaccinated, I answered that the vaccine was ineffective. This made sense, only because we were both engaging in doublespeak.

• "Are you vaccinated?" = "Do you have a vaccine passport?"
• "The vaccine is ineffective" = "No, I'm not vaccinated"
• "I'm not vaccinated" = "I don't have a vaccine passport"

I have little trouble relating to this kind of thinking because I'm a computer programmer by profession. Doublespeak is merely indirection, and indirection is key to good programming. We have statements that reference reality through indirection. It's an effective way to deal with data in computers. It's also an effective way to communicate without commitment. Doublespeak has the advantage of sending messages that are never stated directly. The enemy remains uncertain about the actual state of things, because the enemy doesn't possess the key to unravel the message. The key is vaguely understood by everyone, and hence easy to deny.

Symbolism works at a similar level. I walked the streets of Porto with a cane for a while. It kept hobby fascists away. The cane is a club, and no-one feels compelled to put a man with a club in his place. Yet, a cane is not a club. It is merely an eccentric piece of accessory. The cane is doublespeak.

None of this is necessary in a free world. There's no need for doublespeak in a world where people can speak freely without consequences. Hence, doublespeak can be used as a measure of freedom. The more doublespeak there is, the less freedom. The rise of doublespeak in the West is no coincidence. It's a natural consequence of the tyranny unleashed upon us.

Doublespeak itself is not a tool exclusively owned by tyrants. There's nothing sinister in doublespeak itself. It's mainly a defensive tool. The problem with doublespeak is that it obscures the message so that more thinking is required to process information. Logical thinking cannot be applied to the stated message. The message must first be decoded. This poses a problem for everybody, including experts. The constant coding and decoding of messages is too much for even the most hardened liars to keep up in real time.

Just the other day, there was a slipup in communication related to vaccine passports. Truth was spoken on national TV without proper coding. From a medical perspective, vaccine passports are pointless. Hence, we can conclude that vaccine passports are purely political.

The only surprise in this is that the censors didn't catch it in time, because the truth of the statement has been known to the thinking members of society for a while. If the vaccine is ineffective, then the passports provide no protection. They are pointless from a medical perspective.

This was in essence my message to my brother the other day. Why vaccinate for a passport that serves no medical purpose? The question was implicit in my statement: "The vaccine is ineffective."

Judging from my brother's reaction, I suppose the question never occurred to him. He had been foiled by doublespeak. He took the vaccine in order to get the passport, and realized only later that the passport serves no medical purpose. The passport's only purpose is to control him and limit his movements in case he steps out of line.

In fact, a vaccine passport would serve no real purpose even if the vaccine was effective. The logic behind the vaccine passport is flawed regardless of the vaccines effectiveness.

• If the vaccine is 100% effective = the unvaccinated pose no medical danger
• If the vaccine is useless = the vaccinated and unvaccinated pose identical medical dangers
• If the vaccine is partially effective = the vaccinated pose partial medical danger
• Partial danger = real danger if treated with little caution

Medical apartheid serves no medical purpose. It's counterproductive. Letting people into venues based solely on vaccine passports is sure to spread disease unless the vaccine is 100% effective against the targeted disease, and neutral relative to other diseases. But the vaccine is neither effective against the target, nor neutral in other respects. The vaccinated are weakened by the vaccine, and they have a more homogenous immune system than the unvaccinated. They are therefore more likely to become targeted by other diseases.

The vaccine passport is going to become part of our doublespeak vocabulary.

• Vaccine passport = politically tagged
• Vaccine passport = reduced immunity
• Vaccine passport = danger to self and others

The list goes on. Carrying a vaccine passport is not going to be a privilege for long before it becomes a burden.

Pinocchio

By Walt Disney - Original Trailer (1940), Public Domain, Link