Migration: The Paradigm Case

We hear a politician, for instance, talking about how our country is full. We cannot welcome any further refugees even though they’ll be persecuted to death in their home country for their political views — Even though our country signed the post World War II 1949 UN Refugee Convention. If we let in these refugees fleeing war, we’ll be sacrificing our sovereignty, security and prosperity on the altar of Wokeness. This is the Ungenerous message from the politician’s speech we’re listening to. Yet, once we notice how Ungenerous this politician’s speech is, we know we’re being Negatively Trolled. We’re consuming Disinfolklore.

Source: Applying the ‘Generosity’ Element of the Code of Positive Trolls

Thesis: Any time we hear ANY politician focussing on migration as their policy we need to be on guard. Whenever politicians attempt to hack our minds with Disinfolklore (Small Boat People) that has the Mana of Ungenerosity, we need to recognise they’re being unethically disciplined and in a patient manner, with joyous perseverance, we should remain laser-focussed on sharing our wisdom to undermine their trolls.

Source: Pensees (78)

Migration rhetoric is the paradigm case of Ungenerosity-based Disinfolklore. “Our country is full” is Ungenerous. “They’re eating our dogs” is Ungenerous. “Illegal asylum seekers” is both Ungenerous and a breach of the Refugee Convention — failing Criteria 1 and 2 simultaneously. When a politician makes migration THE issue, Tool 7 fires immediately.

← Previous: Good Enough: When Fact-Checking Is Too Slow | Back to Tool 7: Generosity | Next: The Outgoing Filter: Containment Vessel →