This article was originally published by Ethan Huff at Natural News under the title: State Psychological Experts Now Distancing Themselves From “Nudging” Behavioral Manipulation Pushed During COVID

Government employees who played a pivotal role in “nudging” the American public to comply with various state-level Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) restrictions and mandates are taking a step back by disassociating themselves with the behavioral manipulation tactics they once championed and promoted.

So-called “behavioral science” is suddenly falling out of vogue among state psychological experts who back during the “pandemic” advised government officials to use scare tactics in order to manipulate their constituents into wearing a mask, “social distancing,” and getting “vaccinated” as part of Operation Warp Speed.

Not only are these psychological experts now pretending as though they never “nudged” anyone into COVID tyranny, but they are denying any and all responsibility for the fallout of their manipulation tactics, which include widespread chronic illness as a result of people taking the shots they were “nudged” into receiving.

“Contrary to the evidence of the published outputs of the SPI-B and BIT, a series of behavioral experts have claimed zero responsibility for scaring people (the ‘affect’ nudge) into compliance with the covid-19 restrictions and subsequent vaccine rollout,” reported HART’s Substack about the scandal, citing the following quote from Prof. Ann John, a co-chair of the SPI-B subgroup of SAGE, a behavioral nudging unit:

“We never advised on upping the level of fear. I think it was presented as part of the evidence base … we absolutely advised that fear does not work.”

(Related: Did you know that behavioral “nudging” teams in the UK are manipulating Brits to support “a net zero society” as the solution to the made-up threat of climate change?)

Thanks to your generous support, we are building the infrastructure of human freedom and actively donating our technology to independent publishers, authors, and home-schooling organizations. Learn about our game-changing non-commercial AI project here. Support our ongoing efforts to preserve and enhance human knowledge by shopping at HealthRangerStore.com.

The behavioral “nudgers” won’t get off easy

A year later in March 2023, four members of the same SPI-B headed up by Prof. John – Professors Reicher, Michie, Drury and West – contrived an opinion piece for the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in which they blamed politicians rather than themselves for the “fear inflation” that was so prominent throughout the “pandemic.”

“When Hancock & Case advocated scare tactics, they were going against the scientific advice they had been given,” the four professors claimed in the BMJ piece.

The denials would continue on from there with each of the professors at various points in time denying any and all responsibility for nudging politicians into using scaremongering fear tactics to push medical fascism and tyranny – but the proof is out there that they are all complicit regardless of their denials.

There are many documented outputs from these high-profile nudgers that prove they used fear as a method of promoting compliance. Several of them admitted this on the record to journalists, including investigative journalist Laura Dodsworth.

Professors Rubin and Reicher have both taken their denials to a whole new level by claiming that they were never involved – and in Reicher’s case, that he does not even understand what nudging is.

“I’ve never been quite clear what ‘behavioral scientist’ means,” Reicher said during an appearance at the Scottish leg of the COVID inquiry. “I’m perfectly happy with being called a psychologist and, more specifically, a social psychologist.”

As to what his role entailed during the “pandemic,” Reicher more recently stated that it did not involve “making people do anything” and “wasn’t us telling people to do anything.”

“It was how can we engage with the public and jointly do something,” Reicher now claims. “The key factor in adherence is not your individual risk, it’s the collective risk – it’s the risk to the community.”

Reicher would go on to claim this community approach as his modus operandi, stating that all of his interventions “were about how do you achieve that, how do you scaffold that, how do you support that, how do you create that sense of community?”

The latest news about the after-effects of the COVID “pandemic,” including how its perpetrators are trying to duck out of being held accountable, can be found at Plague.info.