Conte: the rhetoric of a manipulator
Instead, let your speech be: "yes, yes", "no, no"; the more comes from the evil one
The Premier's communications and decisions are diabolical. "Diabolical" in the sense of ambiguous, divisive, dual, ambivalent, false. He introduces doubt in each of his speeches, underlines the exception to consolidate it, highlights the negation to impress an unimaginable concept, opening unprecedented windows of Overton.
To do this, he uses well-established rhetorical techniques used in abundance, for example, in international commercial contracts by multinational boards of directors to better evade and evade taxes and deceive states and their citizens.
They do so through linguistic and rhetorical manipulations whose result is to circumvent the Constitutions, the civil and criminal codes of the individual states and the elementary rights of man.
For example, with reinforcing negation , an unheard-of concept is strengthened, raising a doubt about its future probability of materializing. Conte always speaks like this: he launches messages by denying them in the sentence itself but doing so by recalling the thoughts of listeners, who in his case are at least tens of millions of citizens, on these denied concepts, achieving an amplified effect of "meme". And opening up the possibility in people's collective thinking, in their subconscious, a sine qua non condition to make the unacceptable acceptable.
It is a technique known to some rape victims for having suffered it where the rapist skillfully manipulating his prey, preferably very young and naive, tells her, hypnotizing her: “I won't rape you”! and in the meantime he touches it manually in order to open a passage thanks to the victim's inexperience and fresh hormones.
Remember his "no one will be left alone "? Or his " we are NOT dividing Italy in two "?
Well by saying this, he was just communicating that he was doing exactly the opposite of the denied concepts.
In fact, entire sectors of the country have been abandoned – hotels, restaurants, cafes, crafts, small businesses and others – and I'm talking about the economic backbone of the country, the one that has made it strong and radiant in the world, micro small and medium entrepreneurs who not only did they not receive anything but that they had to advance the supplementary funds and that the most they could get, when they got it, is to get further debt to pay taxes and pay the increases in electricity and gas – since no white fiscal year was expected. When they have not closed because of the government which has enjoined not to work in entire sectors, leaving them exactly to themselves.
When he instituted the tax reduction for companies in southern Italy, he was doing exactly what he claimed not to do: dividing Italy in two , because creating tax differentials between regions of the same country means not only dividing the regions among themselves but introducing an innate inequality that crumbles the equal rights of citizens of a state. In a context of national economic emergency, the aid scheme for companies had to be universal, below certain thresholds and for companies resident in Italy. Especially since the companies most damaged by the emergency were those in the north. Therefore he has done exactly what multinationals have been doing for years in the world and in Europe: differentiate taxation and the welfare state from area to area to better exploit the social, tax, labor and market differentials from one country to another to the advantage. always privileged and hidden shareholders of the usual multinationals. He did just the opposite of what he said.
Now let's examine yesterday's press point on the latest DPCM.
First, the extension to January 31 of the state of emergency on the basis of a "recovery" of the data: the premise is false and not statistically correct as explained in other articles (1) since it is based on the detection in absolute numbers of the results of the PCR swabs which give from 70 to 95% false positives, by the admission of tampons producers and independent scientists and doctors and as finally said by someone in the face of Galli, the super virologist present on TV.
Yesterday 93.5% of the # COVID19 positives were in home isolation, therefore asymptomatic and with mild symptoms.
It denies even that Professor #Galli ? @NicolaPorro #StaseraItalia #DictaturaSanitaria https://t.co/apJx7FlC9X– Francesca Totolo (@francescatotolo) October 8, 2020
Then by extending the state of emergency on the basis of a civil procedure rule that has nothing to do with a health emergency, he contradicts himself when he said, in other dpcm that the extension until October 15 was not further extendable but the paragraph is it was simply changed in the last dpcm: Conte is building a legislation made up of references, substitutions of sentences and retroactive corrections that make the reading of the law opaque and incomprehensible.
All this to make his oral intervention on the fleeting minds of a people in disarray more symbolic and incisive.
The subject of his press point are the protective devices – the masks – to be worn outdoors always "unless he is in a situation of continuous isolation" such as "isolated in the countryside" or "isolated mountains". All this "to avoid new restrictive measures to economic activities".
The manipulation is based on the concept of "for your own good", used with children to force them to do something they do not want to do and then expanded to all the totalitarian and despotic regimes that unleash a nauseating paternalism to take hold of citizens terrified by it regime. Therefore it is clear that we are considered as infants to be manipulated: it is the golden rule of any regime propaganda.
Then the exceptional rule, already in itself constraining and extraordinary with respect to basic human rights, incisive in the order of the symbolic, is immediately added the exception in the exceptionality, albeit denied with the same trick, to prune the possibility of implementation even where no one had ever pushed so hard since the fascist regime onwards: violating the private home and personal freedom (articles 13 and 14 of the Constitution).
To the already exceptional rule that "masks must always be worn", the exception is already imagined, "situation of continuous isolation", but this case is immediately specified and restricted to two cases: outdoors in the countryside and in the mountains. Full stop. The trick is to make the list of what is allowed, when everything is forbidden, by reducing what is allowed to the bone. Even in international contracts, a law is created that is detached from the norms of the States, by first enunciating the rule that seems to adhere to national norms, and then listing all those to be respected, when all of them would be.
Then the other exception in the exceptional, he says, is the private house , of which, the despot regrets, “the state cannot ask citizens to keep their masks inside their homes. It would be (ir) reasonable to keep the mask between people who live together all day. But I would like to say a strong recommendation to all citizens. Even in the family we must be careful, stay at a distance, if we receive friends and acquaintances, we are careful, these are occasions in which the infection spreads more (…) This is a strong recommendation. "
And then shortly after he reaffirms and says: "In family relationships it is clear that the State cannot enter, I believe it is sacrosanct, an expression of a liberal democratic principle, that the State, unless it is absolutely necessary, does not enter private homes."
Apart from that "(ir) reasonable to keep the mask between people who live together all day" that it is not clear whether it is "unreasonable" or "reasonable", due to its bad pronunciation covered by the mask, what need was there to repeat two times the inviolability of the home? Isn't that an implicit sacrosanct right? If it is implicit, why make it explicit? Because by expressing a sacrosanct right as if it were an exception, it falls within a restrictive list of those few exceptions (badly) willingly tolerated in the state of exception. And in fact the State cannot enter the house, but immediately corrects with an incident "unless it is really necessary" and by doing this it lays the foundations – it sets the flea, prepares the ground – for the violations of home and personal freedoms that in mind for the future.
Violations of personal freedoms (and domicile) that are already in place in our country, according to the numerous testimonies of children or people subjected to fiduciary quarantine or in hotels, even with a negative buffer, and certainly completely without symptoms. Quarantines for which there is no certain expiration date.
So the reason why he reiterates the inviolability of the person and the home is exactly this: that he is about to violate them completely and already with technical measures they are doing it, with preventive quarantines following contacts with "positives" and tracking.
And then the final gem: he admits that these rules are not only important as rules, but are important for the reactions to the rules "of a common project of a common destiny, and this is our strength." It is important to test your reactions, he is telling you, which is THEIR strength.
The mask is so symbolic that Trump took care to take it off in the White House, in front of millions of citizens, on leaving the hospital, naturally criticized by all the acolytes of the digital health regime who have stigmatized this gesture considered risky.
This is because Trump responded to a symbolic constraint with another symbolic, theatrical gesture, as if to tell humanity, with gestures, to take off its gag. The mask – by association of ideas – makes one think a little about the Star of David of the Jews before their deportation.
Finally he denied again not to consult the parliament, on the contrary he said that he cannot be accused of this since he frequently goes to parliament, much more than his predecessors: here is for the trick mentioned above, he is saying that instead he is really accountable of this, and puts his hands on.
Excusatio non petita accusatio manifesta
Nforcheri 8/10/2020
References
(1)
https://scenarieconomici.it/chiozza-sui-tamponi-parlano-medici/
Thanks to our Telegram channel you can stay updated on the publication of new articles of Economic Scenarios.
The article Conte: the rhetoric of a manipulator comes from ScenariEconomici.it .
This is a machine translation of a post published on Scenari Economici at the URL https://scenarieconomici.it/conte-la-retorica-di-un-manipolatore/ on Thu, 08 Oct 2020 21:29:00 +0000.