Are you going to take the vaccine?

[Relax]

CONSPIRACY DISCOURSE IS A CLOSED SYSTEM. SO IS A CULT.
The person locked into a conspiracy discourse loop (because it feeds epistemic, existential, and social needs — or because the person sees themselves as an edgelord disruptor) shows remarkable resistance to the two main routes towards freedom:
1) If you show them fact-checked or peer-reviewed evidence that challenges the claim that 5G "activates" COVID-19, they will say that the journalism is corrupt and that the scientists are being paid off by tech companies or Big Pharma.
2) If you expose the lack of evidence for their view, not only are you now attempting to prove a negative, the response will be that the evidence has been suppressed, and that this very suppression itself is proof of the conspiracy in question.
The effort backfires. Let's call this the Evidence Roadblock.
This reminds me of one of the most potent explanatory tools in the cult literature: the notion of the closed system. I'm most familiar with Janja Lalich's terms "closed-charismatic", "self-sealing", and "bounded choice".
The basic idea is that all information, and everything that happens — especially if it is directly contradictory or if it seems negative for the group — confirms the truth of the cult ideology and/or the credibility of the leader.
The Evidence Roadblock, being defensive, isn't enough to keep passions high. There needs to be active Relational Bonding to the ideology or leader as well. In my work I've seen this bonding strengthen through denial, flipping, or rationalization (an incomplete list). When Pattabhi Jois sexually assaults women, the denial says no he didn't, the flipping says that the reason you think he did is because *you're* the predator (and he's showing you this for your own good), and the rationalization says that well yes he did, but it was for your own good. More generically: if a cult leader predicts the end of the world, it's definitely coming. When it doesn't come, it's because he didn't mean it (denial), he's testing you (flipping), or he has some special insight into the delay (rationalization).
Both mechanisms — the roadblock that keeps evidence out and the bonding that keeps the energy in and recirculating — contribute to the speakers' isolation. They are barriers. The isolation is felt even within the cultic or conspiracy discourse group insofar as the line between legal and illegal thoughts is clear and punishing.
(Side note: the conspiracy discourser saying that they reject the "official narrative" is actually a displacement. There is no "official narrative" in public health, but an ongoing exploratory process in which new data provokes new decisions. Conspiracy discourse, by contrast, *is* an "official narrative" that cannot be questioned from within.)
I believe that any communication strategy that exacerbates barriers and isolation (through shame, patronization, etc.) will backfire. Isolation feels like a core problem here. - Matthew Remski