I have no recall of the word "disinformation" being used when I was a child in the early 1950s. Despite having spent several years during the 60s in university study, which included taking classes in sociology, psychology, political science, and law, I never encountered the word at that time either—if my memory remains accurate.
Now, in the early 2020s, I have noticed the word has become fashionable, especially with politicians and media people. The way I see it, the word is unnecessary and worse than useless.
It is unnecessary because there already were words and expressions to adequately describe the nature and types of information that exist. Fundamentally, information is either true or false, accurate or inaccurate. If information is true or accurate, one can and should describe it that way. If the information is only partially true or accurate, it is adequate and unambiguous to describe it that way. If stated information is literally true but deliberately framed in a way to deceive others, then it can be described simply and accurately as information that is a "true lie." A statement such as "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" is the type of information that has the potential to be a true lie. If, in a particular situation, the information is a true lie, it is completely adequate to call it just that. There is no need to bring the word "disinformation" into the discussion.
If information is false or inaccurate, the false or inaccurate nature of the information is either intentional or unintentional on the part of the person who provided it. If it is done deliberately, the information is and should be called a lie. The person who provided it should be thought of as a liar. Whether the liar should be called out for it will depend very much on the identity of the liar, the importance of the lie, and the circumstances in which it was made. Information that is false or inaccurate without being a lie can simply be called false or inaccurate information. There is no need to talk of disinformation.
The word "disinformation" is worse than useless because there is a vagueness and ambiguity about it that fosters confusion rather than clarity. What are ordinary people to make of it when politicians and journalists use the word? When politicians and journalists accuse someone of spreading disinformation, what are they talking about? What exactly do they mean by that? Is it simply their cowardly way of implying the person is a liar deliberately spreading lies? If so, they ought to have the courage and integrity to come out, call the person a liar, call the information lies, and back up their accusation with proof. If they believe or know the information is false or inaccurate but do not know or cannot prove the person spreading it is a liar, then they simply should claim the information is false or inaccurate. Once again, they should not leave the public wondering what they are talking about when they speak of disinformation. Ordinary people do not deserve to be victimized by confusing, cute talk coming from journalists and politicians. End of story!
Delusions: Their Causes and Consequences
Dictionary definitions for "delusion" include "a false belief or opinion" and "a false, persistent belief not substantiated by sensory evidence." Delusional is an apt description for those who hold a delusion or engage in delusional thinking, which is a form of self-deception. The causes of delusions are many, and their consequences vary. This article identifies two specific causes and describes two of many possible consequences.
Back in the mid-1900s, two men who disliked each other met by chance at a party. For clarity, one shall be named "Aggressor" and the other "Victim." All present were consuming alcohol. Aggressor and Victim commenced arguing. Both were chronic serious abusers of alcohol. By the time their heated argument reached a crisis point, both were extremely intoxicated. Acting under the delusion he was immune from the law, Aggressor obtained a gun and pointed it at Victim. In response, Victim, emboldened by the delusion he was invincible, ripped open his shirt, exposing his bare chest to Aggressor. Victim said to him, "If you want to shoot, shoot." Aggressor's gun went bang. Victim went dead. Aggressor went to jail.
Even back in the 1900s, it was a recognized medical fact alcohol could cause delusions, especially for chronic abusers of the substance. In the described tragedy, alcohol caused the delusions. Their consequence was death for one and imprisonment for the other.
Fast forward to the 2020s. There now exists a relatively new social phenomenon causing people to have delusions and engage in delusional thinking. It is known as TRANS IDEOLOGY.
In 2020, two young friends, Albert Brown and Cody Dunn, lived as neighbors in a remote town. Immediately upon graduating from grade twelve at age eighteen, they informed their parents what they wanted to be when they grew up. Albert wanted to be a surgeon, and Cody an aircraft pilot. Their delighted parents sent them off to further their education at a Liberal Arts College in a distant city where they enrolled in an Arts and Science program.
It was a memorable time. They met new people, made new friends, learned new ideas, formed new beliefs, binged on beer, and experienced fornication. Life was good. Despite the novel distractions they encountered, each remained true to his stated aspiration. Each selected Trans Ideology as his major field of study. They learned its fundamental truths and supportive tenets, which are:
1. YOU ARE WHAT YOU WISH YOU WERE.
2. YOU ARE WHAT YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE.
3. TRUTHS 1 AND 2 ARE ABSOLUTE.
The tenets supportive and protective of those truths are:
1. Trans rights supersede all other rights.
2. Those who question or challenge the fundamental truths are transphobic bigoted deniers and must be called out as such.
3. Deniers must be ostracized and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
4. The Ideology must be protected and promoted by all allowable means.
Contrary to what the purveyors of the Ideology would have one believe, Trans Ideology is seriously flawed. Fundamental truth 3 is false because fundamental truths 1 and 2 are not absolute. They are true only if one ALREADY IS what one wishes one were or believes one is. In all other circumstances, those "truths" are false. As a practical matter, they are grossly misleading. When adopted as being the absolute truth, they become delusions in the mind of their believer.
Unaware of its flaws, Albert and Cody became complete believers in and ardent supporters of the Ideology. Upon completion of their college education, they returned home each with a Bachelor of Arts degree. Since childhood, Albert had wished to be a doctor. With no medical training but infused with the fundamental truths of Trans Ideology, Albert proudly proclaimed he was now a trans doctor. Still wishing he was a pilot but having had no formal aeronautics training, Cody relied upon the same ideological truths to inform others he now was a trans pilot.
The two friends sought employment in their home area. Trans Dr. Brown went to see Dr. Dumier, a crusty old curmudgeon but a skilled medical practitioner nevertheless. The meeting did not go well. Once Dr. Dumier heard Brown lacked medical training, he called him a fraud and ordered him to leave. Brown insisted he was a doctor and commenced chanting that trans doctors are doctors. Dr. Dumier's patience ran out. He shouted, "Brown, you are delusional. Bugger off." Becoming emotional, Brown responded, "You have really hurt my feelings, you transphobic, homophobic old bigot. There are human rights laws. You have violated my rights. Your thinking and behavior are out of date. I will be reporting you to the human rights commissioner. You deserve punishment and need thought retraining." With that, Brown left.
Trans Pilot Dunn's job interview at a small commercial airline company ended in similar fashion. Once the interviewer, an experienced pilot, learned Dunn had no aeronautics training, he accused Dunn of being delusional and told him to get out.
Having failed to obtain employment in their home area, the two friends decided to return to the city where they were educated, thinking they would have better luck there. As fate would have it, Dunn's uncle, who was away at the time, owned a small plane. It was left ready for use near where the two friends were. Dunn had been in the plane as a passenger many times when it was flown by his uncle. Trans Pilot Dunn knew how to start the plane's engine. From watching his uncle do it, he knew what one had to do to get the aircraft in the air. Though he had never flown it before, he, now a trans pilot, was confident he could fly the plane to the city where they had studied. With his friend aboard, Dunn got the plane airborne safely. Shortly after, they encountered thick clouds and severe air turbulence. Lacking the training needed to handle those conditions, Trans Pilot Dunn lost control of the plane. It plummeted towards the ground like a shot duck and crashed. The impact killed his passenger. Miraculously, Dunn survived unhurt. His good fortune was short-lived. Authorities investigating the crash soon learned he flew the plane with a passenger in it without a pilot's license and without flight training. He was charged with causing death by criminal negligence. At his trial, he argued that as a trans pilot, he was just as much, and just as good, a pilot as any other pilot. The judge dismissed that submission out of hand, convicted Trans Pilot Dunn, and sentenced him to five years imprisonment. Cody Dunn's belief that he was a pilot obviously was a delusion caused by Trans Ideology. The consequence of the delusion was the death of Albert Brown and the imprisonment of Cody Dunn.
There are lessons to be learned from this analysis and tale of tragedy. As Cody Dunn found out the hard way, wishing he were a pilot and believing he was a pilot did not cause him to be a pilot. As shown, delusions caused by Trans Ideology can be hazardous to one's health. One should avoid becoming mesmerized by the Ideology. For the general good of society, one should speak up, revealing its flaws and dangers. For the specific good of one's children or grandchildren, a person should monitor what is being taught in schools to prevent Trans Ideology zealots from brainwashing the young with harmful dogma.
In conclusion, the author of this article deems it appropriate to inform you, the reader, of three additional things. First, the alcohol-related account in this article is based loosely on a tragic incident that actually happened decades ago. Second, the description and analysis of current Trans Ideology is accurate to the best of this author's understanding. Third, all the persons and events utilized in this article to illustrate the workings and danger of Trans Ideology are fictitious.
