We have been going down the road of virtue signaling for a long time, but under Joe Biden, it is hitting a crescendo. Gone are the days where the left was focused solely on indoctrinating more people. The left is now taking the stance that ‘the science is settled,’ not only to use Critical Race Theory and climate alarmism as supposed facts, and not only to vilify all opposition to their radical agenda, but to pass laws that will over time be used to make opposition to Critical Race Theory, and to climate alarmism, illegal.

When we think of virtue signaling, we usually picture the wearing of a cloth mask over our faces, as we were told to do during the Covid-19 lockdowns imposed in the vast majority of states, and that mask is a great example of a visible signal people wore to demonstrate a willingness to submit to a totalitarian state – at least in times of crisis. I saw people wearing masks where they were not required to do so, such as outside or driving alone inside a car. Joe Biden was wearing two masks in Zoom meetings. He said he was sending a message, and he was. The message was to submit to the edicts of a totalitarian state.

Now that we have conditioned the public to submit to a totalitarian state in times of crisis, all that is left is to keep the country in a constant state of crisis, with new Covid variants, Critical Race Theory, threats of right-wing insurrections, and climate change. Tell us there is a crisis (or four), tell us what to wear (or do) to protect ourselves, and we’ll wear it (or do it) to show our fealty.

We all, of course, think of visible symbols when we hear the phrase ‘virtue signaling,’ but virtue signaling is far more than that. Virtue signaling is a particularly effective form of indoctrination, and in this post, I’m going to tell you exactly how it works.

This form of indoctrination is a fairly straightforward process. We see it all around us every day. It involves making people associate their sense of self-virtue with the political positions they hold, and by extension, it makes them believe that those who hold other political positions lack virtue. Once someone’s sense of self-virtue is tied into their political beliefs, it is virtually impossible for them to ever change those beliefs, as doing so will, in their minds, make them lack virtue. The deeper you can make someone’s association between their political beliefs and their sense of self-virtue, the deeper indoctrinated they become.

Imagine someone with a doctorate in feminist studies. This person has spent eight long years earning degrees through programs that ‘teach’ how our society oppresses women. Now, let’s just say hypothetically that someone earns this degree while living in a society where women are not oppressed. This degree is worthless unless the supposed oppression of women is real, and the person holding that doctorate will associate a great deal of their self-esteem to the fact that they have a degree that makes them an expert in something. How is this person supposed to accept that the oppression their doctorate is based on is not real, and that they wasted eight years of their life ‘studying’ a fallacy? How are they supposed to accept that they are not really an ‘expert’ in anything at all? For the most part, the answer is that such people are in intellectual purgatory – they will never change their beliefs, as doing so would destroy their sense of self-worth.

We need to recognize that while some people will speak of ‘red pill’ moments, and will then become conservatives, for the most part, once someone falls for virtue signaling, they are gone. We are not going to get them back.

Science is a particularly useful weapon when indoctrinating people through virtue signaling. We have actual, hard sciences, and then we have softer sciences. We also have what science actually tells us, and then we have what people tell us science tells us. Geology is a hard science, but feminist studies are not. Peer review in geology involves scientific studies being recreated by other geologists, and generating the same outcomes. Peer review in feminist studies involves other people with doctorates in feminist studies reading someone’s opinions and agreeing.

The humanities have flipped science completely on its head, with people being called ‘courageous’ for pushing the envelope of absurdity further than anyone had previously been dumb enough to push it before – and by having other ‘experts’ agree, the absurd becomes ‘peer reviewed’.

Is climate science a hard science? Kind of. Parts of it certainly are. Other parts are driven by climate models, most of which have no basis in reality. We’ve been modeling for several decades now, and of all the models, the one that has proven to be the most predictive (in terms of what it has said will happen, actually happening over time) is the Russian model. This is also the one that shows the least climate change. Actual science tells us that we need to start looking for ways to reduce our carbon footprint over time, but also that we have ample time to do so. There is no scientific basis for alarmism (alarmism being based on climate models that have, over time, proven themselves wrong). Climate alarmism is pseudoscience.

This is not the first time pseudo-science was created and then weaponized by a political party. Nazi Germany had a group of ‘scientists’ called the Ahnenerbe, who were hired by Heinrich Himmler’s SS to ‘scientifically prove’ the superiority of the Aryan race.

Note what the Ahnenerbe were told to do: they started with a theory – that the Aryan race is superior to all other races – and their job then was to use ‘science’ to prove this theory. If they used the scientific method, they might have started with the same theory, but they would have then created testable hypotheses that could either support or reject that theory. Rejecting the theory was, however, off the table. Himmler hired them specifically to ‘prove’ the theory, and if a ‘scientist’ in the Ahnenerbe brought up data that invalidated the theory, that scientist risked being sent to Dachau (a concentration camp).

When a supposed ‘scientist’ starts with the presumption that a given theory must be true, and then conducts ‘research’ with the stated goal of proving that theory (disproof being taken off the table), that’s not science. There was nothing scientific about what the Ahnenerbe was doing. The Ahnenerbe, rather, was a pseudo-scientific weapon that could be used to label anyone who questioned the superiority of the Aryan race as ‘unscientific.’ The Ahnenerbe had one purpose, and one purpose only: to justify racist policies to the German masses.

We all know that the Ahnenerbe were not really scientists (in spite of the many credentials members of the Ahnenerbe held), and since their methodology was flawed, we all reject their ‘findings,’ but we also have to ask ourselves if the Ahnenerbe were unique, or if other groups have used similar, flawed, pseudo-scientific methods, for nefarious purposes.

The answer is that today’s political left is swimming with Ahnenerbe wannabees, and when we look at such things as climate alarmism, we are dealing with such a group.

Another area where we see Ahnererbe-like pseudoscience is in Critical Race Theory. The logic of Critical Race Theory is circular. It starts with the assumptions that 1) all people are filled with implicit bias in favor of their own race, and 2) our society was created from the ground up, by and for white men, such that white men could oppress and control others. When you dig all the way through Critical Race Theory, you’ll eventually find that all of the conclusions are restatements of the assumptions – it literally starts with, “Racism is at the heart of everything in our country (every person and every system),” and then moves into, “let us use that to try and see where, in the world around us, we can find racism.” The answer should be clear – if you start with the assumption that racism is everywhere, you will, of course, then find racism everywhere. Since the logic is circular, once someone accepts Critical Race Theory, the only way out is to deny the false assumptions – something the modern Ahnenerbe tells us constitutes ‘science denial.’

Mixed in with Critical Race Theory is postmodernism, which ‘teaches’ that we process the world through our five imperfect senses, and that there are a near-infinite number of ways for us to interpret what those senses tell us about the world around us. Postmodernists believe that there is no rational reason to pick one set of interpretations over any other, and thus such things as ‘facts’ and ‘reason’ do not really exist. To the postmodernist, everything is subjective.

The postmodernist will say that concepts such as ‘facts,’ ‘reason,’ the ‘scientific method,’ etc., are all parts of the Western Patriarchy, which is purely Eurocentric, and that we need to broaden our horizons, using the shared thoughts and experiences of people who exist outside of that limited, Eurocentric view. In terms of CRT, this means that if you are not white, your ‘thoughts and experiences’ act as proof, provided, of course, that your ‘thoughts and experiences’ fit in 100% with Critical Race Theory.

Mixing postmodernism with Critical Race Theory takes anything that exists outside of CRT’s circular logic completely off the table. If the data shows that there is no epidemic of unarmed black men being hunted down in the streets by the police, the data is racist, subjective, and off-limits. We have people whose ‘shared thoughts and experiences tell us black men are openly hunted down in the streets by the police, and so that is exactly what is happening (in spite of the many more ‘shared thoughts and experiences that say it is not happening). The CRT proponent continues to rely ONLY on the ‘thoughts and experiences of people who DO believe black men are being openly hunted down by the police, as the ONLY ‘facts’ we are allowed look at.

Ironically, when African Americans in our inner cities are asked, polls show most of them want more police. The people who buy the CRT narrative are primarily white liberals, who then project their own beliefs onto black people while condemning any black person who dares speak against those beliefs.

Just as the Ahnenerbe started with the superiority of the Aryan race as an assumption, and then sought to prove it, so too the CRT proponent starts with systemic white supremacy as an assumption, and then seeks to prove it. Disproof is taken off the table. The methodologies are the same.

In America today, if you use science correctly, and show that CRT and climate alarmism are both garbage (which they are), you are called ‘unscientific’ or a ‘science denier,’ and are dismissed out of hand – just as you would have been had you said Aryans were not the ‘master race’ in Nazi Germany. The only difference is that we don’t have concentration camps for our political dissidents yet.

Thomas Sowell once said, “It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.” To the virtue signaled, ignorance is not only bliss, but it is the basis of virtue. Those who use science to prove the dogma wrong are considered vile, evil, and racist.

We all know what happened on January 6, 2021. There is some question regarding the specifics – what did the FBI know and when did it know it, did the Washington DC Police know it was going to happen in advance, did FBI informants instigate it, etc. – but we know that a group of Trump supporters stormed the Capital building, and caused about $1.5 million in property damage.

The only person supposedly killed by the mob was a police officer who we later found out died of natural causes unrelated to the mob. A couple of people died of strokes or heart attacks, likely related to stress, and one person, an Air Force veteran, named Ashli Babbitt, was shot dead by an unnamed police officer.

Note that January 6, 2021, was not the first time the Capital had been invaded. Protestors broke into the Senate Chambers several times during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, and did so again during the Amy Comey Barrett confirmation hearings. According to USA Today, comparing what happened on January 6, 2021, to what happened during those confirmation hearings, ‘lacks context,’ as the January 6 incident caused damage, but it is worth noting that the police did not shoot anyone during the liberal riots. When you open fire on the rioters, people try to get away from the bullets, and that’s a different ballgame. It is also worth noting that the ANTIFA/BLM rioting that occurred in Washington DC and around the country led to over $2 BILLION in property damage, and cost at least 25 lives.

When the left riots, it is ‘mostly peaceful,’ and when the right riots, it is ‘an insurrection.’ This is in spite of the fact that leftist rioting caused 25 times as many deaths, and 1,333 times as much property damage. Why is the narrative that left-leaning riots are ‘mostly peaceful,’ whereas any right-wing riot is ‘the greatest attack on the United States since 9/11?’ It’s because all other narratives have been taken off the table; we hear only what the Ahnenerbe wants us to hear.

Let’s face the facts that the left, and the government-controlled by the left, only cares about rioting when it is politically convenient to do so. More ominously, the left is passing laws to target and imprison people who have similar beliefs to those who rioted, or, in other words, conservatives.

There is no evidence at all that the rioting on January 6, 2021, was racially motivated, and yet the media constantly tells us that the rioters were white supremacists. If we dig further, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez just yesterday said that the only reason Republicans negotiated the $1.2 trillion infrastructure package down from over $2 trillion (the Republicans also greatly expanded the amount being spent on infrastructure) was that Republicans are racist. AOC actually accused her own party of white supremacy for the sin of negotiating with Republicans.

Note too that thanks to George W. Bush and the 2002 National Defense Act, it is now ‘legal’ (I use quotes as nothing unconstitutional can technically be ‘legal’) to lock up American citizens, indefinitely, without due process or so much as a hearing, if they are suspected of being, or supporting, terrorists. We were thinking of Islamic extremism at the time, but that is no longer the focus. The next time Joe Biden says that the FBI considers right-wing extremism to be the single greatest terrorist threat to the United States, understand that if you are suspected of being a right-wing extremist, or of supporting right-wing extremism, you can be locked up for the rest of your life, without a lawyer or a hearing, and without your family even being told you were taken.

The only thing the government still lacks is the chutzpah to actually arrest conservatives as terrorists. The day where they are willing to do so may be closer than we think.

Should the government decide they want to have a trial against someone being held on suspicion of terrorism (and there is no requirement that they ever have a trial), they can do so using secret witnesses and secret evidence in secret courts that the defendant is not even allowed to attend. So much for due process.

Also, note that the left holds the NRA as being an extremist group, so if you have ever given money to the NRA (or paid membership dues), you qualify as a supporter of right-wing extremism.

Also, note that big tech is openly censoring conservative voices. Our ability to communicate is limited, whereas the left can communicate freely. This greatly hinders our ability, not only to fight virtue signaling, but to coordinate our political efforts. We are rapidly becoming a one-party system.

As for the legitimacy of our elections… We will have to wait for the Arizona election audit to see what evidence of fraud is out there, but consider that Time Magazine did an expose on ‘a well-funded cabal’ that ‘fortified American democracy’ by using Big Tech and the media (which were parts of the cabal) to control our access to information, suppressing any stories that could be considered anti-Biden, and making anything anti-Trump front-page news. This ‘cabal’ worked with governors and state secretaries of state to illegally change election laws. Time does not say that the election itself was fraudulent (other than election laws being illegally changed), but it does say that everything that happened prior to election day was – and Time calls the people who rigged the election ‘heroes.’

If you were playing poker and you watched the dealer carefully stacking the deck each time before dealing, you might call foul. Time Magazine bragged about ‘a well-funded cabal’ doing just that with our election.

Who would call our 2020 election ‘fair’? If you said, “the Ahnenerbe,” you win, and the media just keeps repeating this lie.

Consider for a moment the absurdity of Democrat claims. On the one hand, Democrats teach that America is systemically racist, with racism baked into our DNA. The left spent four years telling us that that racism (along with Russian collusion) was the only reason Donald Trump was elected in 2016. The same Democrats then tell us that the 2020 election was fair and secure (in spite of Time Magazine openly admitting that it was not). Why would someone who believes the American people to be by and large racist, then turn around and trust the American people to choose their President? Anyone who accepts the false assumption that we are a racist people would, of course, not allow us to choose our own President!

What really happened was that ‘a well-funded cabal’ got together to decide who they thought the American people might elect, were the American people worthy of having an actual election, and then we had a sham election that put the person the cabal wanted in the White House. How telling it was that the cabal picked someone who cannot even tie his own shoes anymore: they picked someone they can control. And now we see the most radical, Marxist agenda in American history unfolding right before our eyes.

I’d ask how stupid the cabal thinks we are, but people, they think we’re pretty stupid, and since they have effective control over everything we see or hear in all of our mainstream sources, to a large degree, they are right.

There is something going on that we can only see pieces of, leaving us to speculate on the rest. Gone are the days where the left was focused solely on indoctrinating more people. Virtue signaling has moved past the indoctrination stage and is now openly working to vilify the opposition.

The Biden Administration seems poised to make an outright ban on dissent.