Psychological Attack on the UK

Psychological Attack on the UK

 對英國的心理攻擊

by DR BRUCE SCOTT

(Sunday, 3rd January 2021)

We are in unprecedented times. Not because of the deadliest virus known to mankind, but because we have never been attacked with such ferocious psychological methods as is deliberately being done today by our UK and Scottish governments; measures to coerce us, manipulate us, to scare us, to shame us, and to make us shame other people for not following orders pertaining to COVID–19 measures.

We have been warned previously by many who suffered totalitarian communism in Eastern Europe. We were warned for many decades that such a moment would come to the West if we were not vigilant enough; unfortunately, it seems that our watchfulness has failed and our liberty has been stolen.

We have a lot to learn from history and from the great Russian writer and critic of Soviet communism, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, especially in our present era of the COVID–19 Brave New Normal. In his address to Harvard University in 1978, Solzhenitsyn said:

Many of you have already found out, and others will find out in the course of their lives, that truth eludes us if we do not concentrate our attention totally on its pursuit. But even while it eludes us, the illusion of knowing it still lingers and leads to many misunderstandings. Also, truth seldom is pleasant; it is almost invariably bitter. There is some bitterness in my speech too, but I want to stress that it comes not from an adversary, but from a friend.

Likewise, when it comes to our era of the COVID–19 Brave New Normal, there are many bitter truths we have to face now. 

Applied behavioural psychology

One bitter truth is that we are being manipulated, coerced, frightened and shamed by the state; the very same state that is supposed to have our best interests at heart. The UK and Scottish Governments are using applied behavioural psychology, breaking the ethical guidelines for psychologists, to deliberately ramp up fear in the population. A group of psychologists called SPI-B, part of SAGE, have been tasked with advising the UK and Scottish Governments how to get people to adhere to COVID–19 restrictions. Their document which is freely available on the UK Government website, and which was reported on the UK Column News of 11th May 2020, states  the following:

A substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened.

And:

The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging.

The psychologists of SPI-B and the UK Government knew fear alone would not be enough. Therefore, SPI-B suggested to government the use and promotion of social approval for desired behaviours, to consider enacting legislation to compel required behaviours, and to consider the use of social disapproval for failure to comply. They have used the mainstream media and social media, along with false "fact-checking" and censorship, to get their message across, and it has been working.

Professional standards

The tactics of the SPI-B psychologists who are informing the UK and Scottish Governments’ policies on the COVID–19 response are, in my opinion, contrary to the ethical and practice guidelines of the British Psychological Society (BPS), the psychology equivalent of the Hippocratic Oath for medicine. Below are some excerpts from two documents: the British Psychological Society Code of Ethics and Conduct (2018) and the British Psychological Society Practice Guidelines (2017).

From the British Psychological Society Code of Ethics and Conduct document:

[From Section 3.1]

Statement of values: Psychologists value the dignity and worth of all persons, with sensitivity to the dynamics of perceived authority or influence over persons and peoples and with particular regard to people’s rights.

In applying these values, Psychologists should consider:

(i) Privacy and confidentiality;

(ii) Respect;

(iii) Communities and shared values within them;

(iv) Impacts on the broader environment – living or otherwise;

(v) Issues of power;

(vi) Consent;

(vii) Self-determination;

(viii) The importance of compassionate care, including empathy, sympathy, generosity, openness, distress tolerance, commitment and courage.

And:

3.3 Responsibility

Because of their acknowledged expertise, Psychologists enjoy professional autonomy; responsibility is an essential element of autonomy. Psychologists must accept appropriate responsibility for what is within their power, control or management. Awareness of responsibility ensures that the trust of others is not abused, the power of influence is properly managed and that duty towards others is always paramount.

Statement of values: Psychologists value their responsibilities to persons and peoples, to the general public, and to the profession and science of Psychology, including the avoidance of harm and the prevention of misuse or abuse of their

contribution to society.

In applying these values, psychologists should consider:

(i) Professional accountability;

(ii) Responsible use of their knowledge and skills;

(iii) Respect for the welfare of human, non-humans and

the living world;

(iv) Potentially competing duties.

From the British Psychological Society Practice Guidelines document:

4. Safeguarding

Safeguarding means protecting people’s health, wellbeing and human rights, and enabling them to live free from harm, abuse and neglect […] Abuse takes many forms and cuts through various domains of life. The categories below are often referred to in investigation/legislation context and are not mutually exclusive with e.g. emotional abuse featuring in the other domains of abuse. Abuse can be found across all sections of society, irrelevant of gender, age, ability, religion, race, ethnicity, personal circumstances, financial background or sexual orientation.

• Physical abuse is the use of physical force or mistreatment of one person by another which may or may not result in actual physical injury. This could include hitting, poisoning, deprivation of food, water or liberty, rough handling or exposure to heat or cold, amongst other things […]

• Psychological/emotional abuse is behaviour that is psychologically harmful or inflicts mental distress by threat, humiliation or other verbal/non-verbal conduct. This may include threats, blaming, controlling, intimidation or coercion amongst other things.

• Financial abuse is actual or attempted theft, fraud or burglary. It is the misappropriation or misuse of money, property, benefits, material goods or other asset transactions which the person did not, or could not, consent to, or which were invalidated by intimidation, coercion or deception […]

• Institutional abuse is the mistreatment or neglect by a regime or individuals, in settings which people who may be at risk reside in or use. Institutional abuse may occur when routines, systems and regimes result in poor standards of care, poor practice and behaviours, inflexible regimes and rigid routines which violate the dignity and human rights of the adults and place them at risk of harm. It may occur within a culture that denies, restricts or curtails privacy, dignity, choice and independence. It involves the collective failure of a service provider or an organisation to provide safe and appropriate services and includes a failure to ensure the necessary preventative and/or protective measures are in place.

• Neglect is the persistent failure to meet basic physical and/or psychological needs. It may involve a parent or carer failing to provide adequate food, clothing and shelter, failing to provide or unresponsiveness to, basic emotional needs or failing to protect from physical harm.

It seems quite clear from the above ethics and practice guidelines that the explicit tactics of SPI-B — making people more fearful by deliberately ramping up their sense of personal threat, and encouraging people to shame others for not following regulations — have breached the ethical and practice guidelines governing the use of applied psychology. 

Mental health crisis 

From the reports of several mental health charities, and from UK and Scottish Government reports, it is clear that mental ill-health is in a crisis because of the COVID19 response/measures. Suicide risk has undoubtedly been greatly increased; when the official figures are completed, I have no doubt that there will have been, and there will continue to be, many suicides because of the COVID–19 governmental response. People have been isolated from friends, family and ordinary daily social interaction (and even from seeing a full face, due to mask wearing). They cannot travel freely.  Many are stopped from working and transacting. Many businesses have gone and will go bust, and many people face losing their homes and becoming unemployed. Is this what applied psychology and responsible government was intended to achieve — to make us mentally unwell, suicidal, and to remove our sovereign rights of freedom and liberty? This is nothing but a tyranny.

All this has come to pass based on the threat posed by a virus, despite huge disagreement about the nature of this threat within the scientific community (for example, the Great Barrington Declaration signed by 50,000 scientists and doctors). However, UK and Scottish Government policy seems intent on taking the most damaging route for society for all concerned, relying on advice from scientific advisors who seem determined to change society forever based on the idea that a wonder vaccine will return us to normality: not the old normal, of course, but a new normal where surveillance, vaccine/immunity passports, and a cashless society will be the only way where people can shop, travel and work. Seems kind of harsh? Well, unethical diktats usually break over into the realm of abuse.

Abuse

The COVID–19 response, with its resulting misery, fear, austerity and hopelessness, seems increasingly to equate to society-wide abuse. The similarities to domestic physical and psychological abuse, coercion and manipulation are striking. When reading the below, please bear in mind the restrictions that the UK is under. The applicability of the concept of abuse to the COVID–19 restrictions and their effects is self-evident.

Physical abuse is the use of physical force or mistreatment of one person by another which may or may not result in actual physical injury. This could include hitting, poisoning, deprivation of food, water or liberty.

Psychological or emotional abuse is behaviour that is psychologically harmful or inflicts mental distress by threat, humiliation or other verbal/non-verbal conduct. This may include threats, blaming, controlling, intimidation or coercion, amongst other things, as well as isolation from friends and family. Abusers want to know the victim’s whereabouts and obsessively track and check the victim’s location at all times.  

Financial abuse is actual or attempted theft, fraud or burglary. It is the misappropriation or misuse of money, property, benefits, material goods or other asset transactions which the person did not, or could not, consent to, or which were invalidated by intimidation, coercion or deception.

In the realms of abuse by the government, the definition of institutional abuse is fitting. Institutional abuse may occur when routines, systems and regimes result in poor standards of care, inflexible regimes and rigid routines which violate the dignity and human rights of the adults and place them at risk of harm. It may occur within a culture that denies, restricts or curtails privacy, dignity, choice and independence. Institutional neglect is the persistent failure to meet basic physical and/or psychological needs.

Physical or psychological abuse follows a pattern of abuse and manipulation, often involving a phase of ‘grooming’. As a population, it seems we have been groomed since March.

Most survivors of abuse say that at the beginning of their relationship, their partner was charming and affectionate, that they expressed love for them very quickly and wanted to spend a lot of time together with them. Abusive behaviour is interspersed with warmth and kindness, slowly desensitising the victim to the behaviour.

Perpetrators use a wide range of hidden tactics to maintain control and brainwash their victim, by presenting insults as a joke, by gaslighting, and by presenting different versions of events.

Duped 

Thus, at the beginning of the COVID–1984 nightmare, we were told we needed a three weeks' lockdown to "flatten the curve", save the NHS, and save lives. We were told to be good, and we have been good. We were told by the Government that they cared about us, that they loved us. But now, seven months later, we are told things are out of control, that we are at tipping point; that they only way out of this is for a vaccine, for an immunity passport, for a New Normal or Building Back Better to form a New World Order. We have been duped. We were good, we did our best, but now we have been told we are complacent, and we are now trapped, just like a victim of abuse.

Professor Susan Michie, a psychologist with SPI-B of SAGE, speaking on LBC Radio with Andrew Castle on 4 October 2020, declared how the population had been complacent by not following COVID–19 regulations. Castle mentioned all the businesses going bust and the rising unemployment. Michie retorted that people will just have to retrain for new jobs or careers. She even mentioned that because of social distancing measures needed for schools (and other workplaces, I presume), government should just take over unused or empty buildings to adapt to the new regime. Sound familiar? It should. That’s because this is what happened under totalitarian communism. Not surprising, as Susan Michie is a member of the Communist Party of Britain.

Like the abuser, the UK and Scottish Governments keep changing the story and goalposts to try to placate us. One minute, the crisis is the so-called deaths from COVID–19, the next minute it is the R number, and now we have a casedemic based on a questionable PCR test, which it seems will place us into a Kafkaesque indefinite COVID–1984: it seems the PCR test can be used and manipulated to bolster population control and movement at a whim; the PCR test was never designed for such diagnostic purposes or to inform public health policies in this way. And then they tell us we have been too complacent and that even more draconian measures could be needed for months or years to come, until a rushed-out unsafe vaccine can save us.

The COVID–19 Brave New Normal is an experiment in which the long-term outcomes on children are as yet unknown; but, from what we know about developmental psychology, it is highly probable that the government(s) are harming future generations.

Complicit

While the unethical psy-op carries on, the British Psychological Society (the regulator of psychologists), the Health and Care Professions Council, psychologists, mental health charities, psychotherapy organisations, politicians, and so-called political activists are completely silent about this deliberate psychological torture of our society and our children. Is the silence from the British Psychological Society because the Director of Policy of the BPS, Kathryn Scott, is on SPI-B of SAGE?

The silence from the aforementioned groups and individuals is unacceptable; it is complicity.

The data and the science are clear: COVID–19 is not a threat requiring us to lock down society and destroy the economy. COVID–19 is the equivalent of a bad flu season. The PCR test is unreliable and should not be used as a diagnostic instrument, and the use of the PCR has contributed to what is now just a casedemic. The hospitals are not overwhelmed; they never were, nor ever will be. Indeed, the famous Nightingale Hospitals were never used and for all intents and purposes have been decommissioned.

Why have mask wearing and hand sanitising not seen a reduction in the yearly average for flu deaths, and why are flu deaths currently outstripping deaths from COVID–19? This is a question never asked by a UK mainstream journalist. Why are the politicians not yelling in anger that lockdown measures will cause more deaths that COVID–19? People cannot get operations, people cannot get screened for illness and disease, people cannot see a dentist, and people cannot see their friends and family. Isolation is a huge killer, especially for old people who are unable to see loved ones if they are in a care home.

Inexplicable

It seems clear that COVID–19 is an excuse to take away our freedom and liberty. But here are some things to bear in mind:

Churches are closed, brothels are open. The rule of six does not apply to supermarkets. We have to wear masks in supermarkets, but MPs and MSPs from many households can meet in the UK and Scottish Parliaments, without masks. Children have to wear masks and are not allowed to sing in school, yet politicians can shout and mingle unmasked in government buildings. Children cannot say goodbye to a dying parent; old people are dying alone, unable to be comforted by loved ones. Matt Hancock, allegedly, can drink wine in the Houses of Parliament Bar after the 10 pm curfew — not socially distancing, of course. We can go grouse shooting but not to a restaurant. Amazon is doing a roaring trade, as are the big multi-national supermarkets, but the High Street is dying.

In Scotland, it was estimated two months ago that one half of all small and medium-sized business will not make it out of this mess. No doubt, with the new measures in Scotland, the list of businesses going bust will be even bigger.

In the good old days, before COVID–19, social justice activists used to cry that "austerity kills". Those activists now are silent; they put on their masks and comply with the regulations whilst the economy burns. In the age of #MeToo, we became used to people calling out abuse and abusers. There is widespread abuse now with the COVID–19 measures, #MeToo activists are silent. Pre-COVID–19, the Adverse Childhood Experience “movement” (ACEs, ACE Aware, etc.) was concerned with negative childhood experiences. Now, they say nothing about children being forced to wear masks, of having to socially distance in classrooms, nor about children are being scared witless by being continually told in school that they are in danger of death, even though the risk of children getting even mild symptoms of COVID–19 is minuscule. ACE awareness, it seems, does not stretch to inappropriate fear-mongering and depriving children of oxygen by muzzling.

Cognitive dissonance 

How strange it all is. Can people see how illogical these positions are? Can people perceive the cognitive dissonance in those tasked with making decisions?

The psychological attack, the abusive nature of it, the illogicality of measures and the cognitive dissonance of those who should speak out confuses us, frightens us, angers us and demoralises us. As KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov indicated in relation to the takeover of totalitarian communism, we are in the stage of demoralisation. The psy-op of SPI-B and the politicians who dictate to us are deliberately trying to frighten us, scare us, shame us and sap our morale.

Unfortunately, at the moment there are not enough people (especially politicians and mainstream media journalists) with the necessary courage to call out the tyranny and call out the abuser. Historically, this has also been a problem: both on the political and on the personal scale, the victim finds great difficulty calling out their abuser. In a critical remark and warning to the West, Alexander Solzhenitsyn said in his Harvard address in 1973:

A decline in courage may be the most striking feature which an outside observer notices in the West in our days. The Western world has lost its civil courage, both as a whole and separately, in each country, each government, each political party, and, of course, in the United Nations ... Should one (have to) point out that from ancient times declining courage has been considered the beginning of the end?

In our COVID–19 Brave New Normal, let us not ignore the warnings of the past and the historical events through which totalitarian regimes came to flourish. A totalitarian medical technocracy is now being forced upon us. Let us be courageous, let us be brave. We have to do this for our children and grandchildren. If we do not, they will never forgive us and we will never be able to forgive ourselves.

[Dr Bruce Scott is a psychoanalyst and author.]

布魯斯·斯科特博士

 （2021 年 1 月 3 日，星期日）

 我們正處於前所未有的時代。 不是因為人類已知的最致命的病毒，而是因為我們從未受到英國和蘇格蘭政府今天故意使用的如此兇猛的心理方法的攻擊； 脅迫我們、操縱我們、恐嚇我們、羞辱我們以及讓我們因不遵守與 COVID-19 措施有關的命令而羞辱其他人的措施。

許多在東歐遭受極權主義共產主義的人以前曾警告過我們。 幾十年來，我們一直被警告說，如果我們不夠警惕，西方就會出現這樣的時刻。 不幸的是，我們的警惕似乎失敗了，我們的自由被盜了。

 我們可以從歷史以及偉大的俄羅斯作家和蘇聯共產主義批評家亞歷山大·索爾仁尼琴那裡學到很多東西，尤其是在我們當前的 COVID-19 勇敢新常態時代。 1978 年，索爾仁尼琴在哈佛大學的演講中說：

 你們中的許多人已經發現，而且其他人會在他們的生活中發現，如果我們不將注意力完全集中在對真理的追求上，那麼我們就會逃避真理。 但是，即使我們不知道它，知道它的錯覺仍然揮之不去，並導致許多誤解。 而且，真理很少是令人愉快的。 它幾乎總是苦澀的。 我的講話也有一些苦澀，但我想強調的是，這不是來自對手，而是來自朋友。

 同樣，當談到我們的 COVID-19 勇敢新常態時代時，我們現在必鬚麵對許多痛苦的事實。

應用行為心理學

 一個殘酷的事實是，我們正在被國家操縱、脅迫、恐懼和羞辱。 應該把我們的最大利益放在心上的同一個國家。 英國和蘇格蘭政府正在利用應用行為心理學，違反心理學家的道德準則，故意加劇民眾的恐懼。 一組名為 SPI-B 的心理學家是 SAGE 的一部分，他們的任務是向英國和蘇格蘭政府建議如何讓人們遵守 COVID-19 限制。 他們的文件可在英國政府網站上免費獲得，並在 2020 年 5 月 11 日的英國專欄新聞上進行了報導，其中指出：

 相當多的人仍然沒有感到足夠的個人威脅。

 和：

 需要使用強硬的情感信息來提高自滿情緒的人對個人威脅的感知程度。

專業標準

 在我看來，向英國和蘇格蘭政府通報 COVID-19 應對政策的 SPI-B 心理學家的策略違反了英國心理學會 (BPS) 的道德和實踐指南，相當於心理學 希波克拉底醫學誓言。 以下是兩份文件的節選：英國心理學會道德與行為準則（2018 年）和英國心理學會實踐指南（2017 年）。

 來自英國心理學會道德與行為準則文件：

 [來自第 3.1 節]

 價值觀聲明：心理學家重視所有人的尊嚴和價值，對感知到的權威或對個人和人民的影響的動態敏感，特別是對人民的權利。

 在應用這些價值觀時，心理學家應該考慮：

 (i) 隱私和保密；

 (ii) 尊重；

 (iii) 社區和其中的共同價值觀；

 (iv) 對更廣泛環境的影響——生活或其他；

 ㈤ 權力問題；

 (vi) 同意；

 (vii) 自決；

 (viii) 富有同情心的關懷的重要性，包括同理心、同情心、慷慨大方、開放性、容忍痛苦、承諾和勇氣。

 和：

 3.3 責任

由於他們公認的專業知識，心理學家享有專業自主權； 責任是自治的基本要素。 心理學家必須對他們的權力、控製或管理範圍內的事情承擔適當的責任。 責任意識確保他人的信任不被濫用，影響力得到妥善管理，對他人的責任始終是最重要的。

 價值觀聲明：心理學家重視他們對個人和人民、對公眾以及對心理學專業和科學的責任，包括避免傷害和防止濫用或濫用他們的

 對社會的貢獻。

 在應用這些價值觀時，心理學家應該考慮：

 ㈠ 專業問責制；

 (ii) 負責任地使用他們的知識和技能；

 (iii) 尊重人類、非人類和人類的福祉

 活生生的世界；

 (iv) 潛在的競爭職責。

 來自英國心理學會實踐指南文件：

 4. 保障

保障意味著保護人們的健康、福祉和人權，使他們能夠免於傷害、虐待和忽視[……]虐待有多種形式，並貫穿生活的各個領域。 以下類別通常在調查/立法背景下被提及，並且與例如不相互排斥的類別。 其他虐待領域中的情感虐待。 虐待遍布社會各個階層，與性別、年齡、能力、宗教、種族、民族、個人情況、經濟背景或性取向無關。

 • 身體虐待是指對一個人使用武力或虐待，這可能會或可能不會導致實際的身體傷害。 這可能包括毆打、中毒、剝奪食物、水或自由、粗暴處理或暴露於熱或冷等 [...]

 • 心理/情感虐待是指通過威脅、羞辱或其他語言/非語言行為對心理有害或造成精神痛苦的行為。 這可能包括威脅、指責、控制、恐嚇或脅迫等。

 • 財務濫用是實際或企圖盜竊、欺詐或入室盜竊。 這是個人沒有或不能同意或因恐嚇、脅迫或欺騙而無效的金錢、財產、利益、物質貨物或其他資產交易的盜用或濫用 [...]

 • 機構虐待是指一個政權或個人在可能處於危險中的人們居住或使用的環境中的虐待或忽視。 當常規、系統和製度導致護理標準低下、實踐和行為不佳、制度僵化和僵化的常規侵犯成人的尊嚴和人權並使他們面臨受到傷害的風險時，就可能發生機構虐待。 它可能發生在否認、限製或削弱隱私、尊嚴、選擇和獨立性的文化中。 它涉及服務提供商或組織未能提供安全和適當的服務，包括未能確保採取必要的預防和/或保護措施。

 • 忽視是持續未能滿足基本的生理和/或心理需求。 它可能涉及父母或照顧者未能提供足夠的食物、衣服和住所，未能提供或沒有回應基本的情感需求，或未能保護免受身體傷害。

 從上述道德和實踐指南中可以清楚地看出，SPI-B 的明確策略——通過故意增加個人威脅感來使人們更加恐懼，並鼓勵人們因不遵守規定而羞辱他人——違反了道德和 管理應用心理學使用的實踐指南。

 心理健康危機

從幾個心理健康慈善機構的報告以及英國和蘇格蘭政府的報告來看，很明顯，由於 COVID19 的應對/措施，心理疾病正處於危機之中。 自殺風險無疑大大增加了； 當官方數據完成後，我毫不懷疑，由於 COVID-19 政府的反應，將會有而且還會繼續有許多自殺事件。 人們與朋友、家人和普通的日常社交互動（甚至由於戴口罩而無法看到全臉）隔離開來。 他們不能自由旅行。 許多人停止工作和交易。 許多企業已經破產並將破產，許多人面臨失去家園和失業的境地。 這就是應用心理學和負責任的政府想要達到的目的嗎——讓我們精神不適、自殺，並剝奪我們的自由和自由的主權權利？ 這不過是一種暴政。

 儘管科學界對這種威脅的性質存在巨大分歧（例如，由 50,000 名科學家和醫生簽署的《偉大的巴林頓宣言》），但所有這一切都是基於病毒構成的威脅而發生的。 然而，英國和蘇格蘭政府的政策似乎打算對所有相關人員採取對社會最具破壞性的路線，依靠科學顧問的建議，他們似乎決心永遠改變社會，因為神奇疫苗將使我們恢復正常：不是 舊常態，當然，但新常態，監控、疫苗/免疫護照和無現金社會將是人們購物、旅行和工作的唯一方式。 好像有點狠？ 嗯，不道德的命令通常會進入濫用領域。

虐待

 COVID-19 的反應及其帶來的痛苦、恐懼、緊縮和絕望似乎越來越等同於全社會的虐待。 與家庭身體和心理虐待、脅迫和操縱的相似之處是驚人的。 閱讀以下內容時，請牢記英國受到的限制。 濫用概念對 COVID-19 限制及其影響的適用性是不言而喻的。

 身體虐待是指對一個人使用體力或虐待，這可能會或可能不會導致實際的身體傷害。 這可能包括毆打、中毒、剝奪食物、水或自由。

 心理或情感虐待是指通過威脅、羞辱或其他語言/非語言行為對心理有害或造成精神痛苦的行為。 這可能包括威脅、指責、控制、恐嚇或脅迫等，以及與朋友和家人隔離。 施虐者想知道受害者的下落，並一直痴迷地跟踪和檢查受害者的位置。

財務濫用是實際或企圖盜竊、欺詐或入室盜竊。 它是對金錢、財產、利益、物質貨物或其他資產交易的挪用或濫用，而該人沒有或不能同意，或因恐嚇、脅迫或欺騙而無效。

 在政府濫用職權的領域，機構濫用的定義是恰當的。 當例行程序、系統和製度導致護理標準低下、制度僵化和僵化的例行程序侵犯成年人的尊嚴和人權並使他們處於受到傷害的風險中時，就可能發生機構虐待。 它可能發生在否認、限製或削弱隱私、尊嚴、選擇和獨立性的文化中。 機構忽視是持續未能滿足基本的身體和/或心理需求。

 身體或心理虐待遵循虐待和操縱的模式，通常涉及“修飾”階段。 作為一個人口，我們似乎自三月以來就已經被培養了。

 大多數虐待倖存者表示，在他們的關係開始時，他們的伴侶很有魅力和深情，他們很快就表達了對他們的愛，並想花很多時間和他們在一起。 虐待行為穿插著溫暖和善意，慢慢地使受害者對這種行為不敏感。

 施暴者使用各種隱藏的策略來維持對受害者的控制和洗腦，例如將侮辱視為笑話、點燃煤氣燈以及呈現不同版本的事件。

 受騙

因此，在 COVID-1984 噩夢開始時，我們被告知我們需要三週的封鎖來“拉平曲線”，拯救 NHS 並挽救生命。 我們被告知要很好，我們一直很好。 政府告訴我們，他們關心我們，愛我們。 但現在，七個月後，我們被告知事情已經失控，我們正處於臨界點； 他們唯一的出路是疫苗，免疫護照，新常態或重建更好的建設以形成新的世界秩序。 我們被騙了。 我們很好，我們盡了最大努力，但現在我們被告知我們自滿了，我們現在被困住了，就像虐待的受害者一樣。

 SAGE SPI-B 的心理學家 Susan Michie 教授於 2020 年 10 月 4 日在 LBC 廣播電台與 Andrew Castle 發表講話，宣布民眾因不遵守 COVID-19 規定而自滿。 卡斯爾提到了所有破產的企業和不斷上升的失業率。 Michie 反駁說，人們只需要重新培訓即可獲得新的工作或職業。 她甚至提到，由於學校（以及其他工作場所，我想）需要採取社會疏離措施，政府應該接管未使用或空置的建築物以適應新制度。 聽起來有點熟？ 它應該。 那是因為這是在極權共產主義下發生的事情。 這並不奇怪，因為蘇珊米奇是英國共產黨的成員。

 像施虐者一樣，英國和蘇格蘭政府不斷改變故事和目標，試圖安撫我們。 前一分鐘，危機是所謂的 COVID-19 死亡，下一分鐘是 R 號，現在我們有一個基於可疑 PCR 測試的病例，這似乎會讓我們陷入卡夫卡式的無限期 COVID- 1984 年：似乎可以使用和操縱 PCR 測試來加強人口控制和一時興起的人口流動； PCR 測試從未設計用於此類診斷目的或以這種方式告知公共衛生政策。 然後他們告訴我們，我們太自滿了，未來幾個月或幾年可能需要更嚴厲的措施，直到一種匆忙推出的不安全疫苗可以拯救我們。

 COVID-19 Brave New Normal 是一項實驗，對兒童的長期結果尚不清楚； 但是，根據我們對發展心理學的了解，政府很可能正在傷害後代。

 同謀

儘管不道德的心理行動仍在繼續，但英國心理學會（心理學家的監管機構）、健康與護理專業委員會、心理學家、心理健康慈善機構、心理治療組織、政治家和所謂的政治活動家對這種蓄意的行為完全保持沉默 對我們的社會和我們的孩子的心理折磨。 英國心理學會的沉默是因為 BPS 的政策主管 Kathryn Scott 在 SAGE 的 SPI-B 上嗎？

 上述群體和個人的沉默是不可接受的； 這是同謀。

 數據和科學很清楚：COVID-19 不是要求我們封鎖社會和破壞經濟的威脅。 COVID-19 相當於嚴重的流感季節。 PCR 測試不可靠，不應該用作診斷工具，PCR 的使用導致了現在只是一種病例流行病。 醫院並沒有不堪重負； 他們從來沒有，也永遠不會。 事實上，著名的南丁格爾醫院從未使用過，並且出於所有意圖和目的都已退役。

 為什麼戴口罩和洗手消毒並沒有減少流感死亡的年平均數，為什麼流感死亡人數目前超過 COVID-19 死亡人數？ 這是英國主流記者從未問過的問題。 為什麼政客們沒有憤怒地大喊封鎖措施會導致比 COVID-19 更多的死亡？ 人們無法進行手術，人們無法接受疾病篩查，人們無法看牙醫，人們無法見到他們的朋友和家人。 隔離是一個巨大的殺手，特別是對於那些在養老院無法見到親人的老人來說。

 莫名其妙

很明顯，COVID-19 是剝奪我們自由和自由的藉口。 但這裡有一些事情要記住：

 教堂關閉，妓院開放。 六法則不適用於超市。 我們在超市必須戴口罩，但許多家庭的議員和 MSP 可以在英國和蘇格蘭議會見面，而無需戴口罩。 孩子們必須戴口罩，不允許在學校唱歌，但政客可以不戴面具地在政府大樓里大喊大叫。 孩子們無法與垂死的父母說再見； 老人孤獨地死去，無法得到親人的安慰。 據稱，晚上 10 點宵禁後，馬特漢考克可以在議會大廈酒吧喝酒——當然，不能保持社交距離。 我們可以去打松雞，但不能去餐館。 亞馬遜和大型跨國超市的生意蒸蒸日上，但商業街正在消亡。

 在蘇格蘭，兩個月前估計有一半的中小型企業無法擺脫這種混亂局面。 毫無疑問，隨著蘇格蘭的新措施，破產企業的名單將會更大。

 在過去的美好時光中，在 COVID-19 之前，社會正義活動家曾經高呼“緊縮致死”。 那些激進分子現在保持沉默； 他們戴上口罩並在經濟燃燒時遵守規定。 在#MeToo 時代，我們已經習慣了人們大聲疾呼虐待和施虐者。 現在，COVID-19 措施普遍存在濫用行為，#MeToo 活動人士保持沉默。 在 COVID-19 之前，不良童年經歷“運動”（ACEs、ACE Aware 等）與消極的童年經歷有關。 現在，他們隻字未提孩子被迫戴口罩，不得不在教室裡保持社交距離，也沒有說孩子們因為在學校不斷被告知他們有死亡的危險而被嚇得不知所措，即使孩子們有被報復的風險 COVID-19 的輕微症狀是微不足道的。 ACE 意識似乎並沒有延伸到不恰當的恐懼散佈和通過摀嘴剝奪兒童的氧氣。

 認知失調

這一切是多麼奇怪。 人們能看出這些立場有多不合邏輯嗎？ 人們能感知那些負責決策的人的認知失調嗎？

 心理攻擊、它的濫用性質、措施的不合邏輯以及應該說出來的人的認知失調使我們感到困惑、恐懼、憤怒和士氣低落。 正如克格勃叛逃者尤里·貝茲梅諾夫在接管極權共產主義時所指出的那樣，我們正處於士氣低落的階段。 SPI-B 的心理戰和對我們發號施令的政客們故意試圖嚇唬我們、嚇唬我們、羞辱我們並打擊我們的士氣。

 不幸的是，目前沒有足夠的人（尤其是政客和主流媒體記者）有必要的勇氣來呼籲暴政並呼籲施虐者。 從歷史上看，這也是一個問題：無論是在政治上還是在個人層面上，受害者都很難說出施虐者。 在對西方的批評和警告中，亞歷山大·索爾仁尼琴在 1973 年的哈佛演講中說：

 在我們這個時代，外部觀察者在西方注意到的最顯著的特徵可能是勇氣的下降。 西方世界在每個國家、每個政府、每個政黨，當然在聯合國都失去了作為一個整體和單獨的公民勇氣......應該（必須）指出，從古代 時代沒落的勇氣已被認為是結束的開始？

 在我們的 COVID-19 勇敢新常態中，讓我們不要忽視過去的警告以及極權主義政權蓬勃發展的歷史事件。 現在，一個極權主義的醫療技術專家正被強加給我們。 讓我們勇敢，讓我們勇敢。 我們必須為我們的子孫後代做這件事。 如果我們不這樣做，他們將永遠不會原諒我們，我們也永遠無法原諒自己。

 [布魯斯·斯科特博士是一位精神分析學家和作家。]