| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Easy Money 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10669
|
 Posted: December 13 2020 at 18:25 |
 siLLy puPPy wrote:
Easy Money wrote:
This is probably not near complicated or paranoid enough for some of you, but I still think when I need medical advice I'm going to go to my doctor. |
Considering medical malpractice is the third leading cause of death in the USA, why do you confuse paranoia for downright mistrust and being informed of the reality that exists?
As a biology major i have much more insight into how utterly incompetent the medical system is. If you do not fall into the business plan paradigm which they have crafted then you are basically ruined. There's a reason medical school is so expensive. It's a financial trap.
|
Sorry pal, between you and my doctor, I think I like my doctor better.
|
 |
siLLy puPPy
Special Collaborator
PSIKE, JRF/Canterbury, P Metal, Eclectic
Joined: October 05 2013
Location: SFcaUsA
Status: Offline
Points: 15302
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 18:22 |
Easy Money wrote:
This is probably not near complicated or paranoid enough for some of you, but I still think when I need medical advice I'm going to go to my doctor. |
Considering medical malpractice is the third leading cause of death in the USA, why do you confuse paranoia for downright mistrust and being informed of the reality that exists?
As a biology major i have much more insight into how utterly incompetent the medical system is. If you do not fall into the business plan paradigm which they have crafted then you are basically ruined. There's a reason medical school is so expensive. It's a financial trap.
|
 https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy
|
|
siLLy puPPy
Special Collaborator
PSIKE, JRF/Canterbury, P Metal, Eclectic
Joined: October 05 2013
Location: SFcaUsA
Status: Offline
Points: 15302
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 18:18 |
BaldFriede wrote:
siLLy puPPy wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
siLLy puPPy wrote:
suitkees wrote:
^ Now, this sounds a bit different than what you said before, which was more a stance against the capitalist/corporate powers - to which I actually agree with, but especially in the sense to combat the inequalities between people that a capitalist system creates and/or tries to maintain. But the solution you seem to promote is just to adopt the same capitalist/corporate stance for your own financial gain, thus maintaining the inequalities between people of a same society - promoting egoism over solidarity. Exactly the same selfishness that drives people not to wear masks in these covid-dominated times (to get back to the thread topic...).
|
Navigating the legal system and adhering to natural laws are two completely different topics. Anybody can still be a profit seeking psychopath as a sovereign secure creditor. Many of the rich elites already know all this stuff which is why they avoid paying federal income taxes. They research this information. Most don't. As far as masks go, there is no consensus on that. My point of bringing up this legal stuff is to show that those who are making decisions about public health are really corporations disguising as governments making these mandates for their own agendas. When it comes to this sovereignty stuff the financial part is a benefit but escaping the jurisdiction of the psychopaths is golden.
Think of it like this. When you work for a corporation like Wal-Mart for example, you agree to abide by the company's policies while you are at the job. When you are a citizen of the US corporation (or any other around the planet) you are agreeing to its policies and therefore subject to its rules and regulations and forfeiting your constitutional rights. By going through all this legal mumbo jumbo you are basically becoming an independent contractor and can operate as benign or as maliciously as the freewill universe allows. Many of the richest individuals understand these concepts which is why they monopolize the markets.
These principles very much apply to this service corporation dictating mask wearing, lockdowns etc. As a biologist who studies what's going on, i see more agenda playing out than actual science.
|
I just want to point out that there is no such thing as "adhering to natural laws".
|
Oh really? Gravity isn't a natural law? Go ahead and jump off a cliff and see if those laws don't apply to you whether you believe in them or not.
|
You are missing my point. Of course there are natural laws. But saying you "adhere" to them to me implies that there is some way not to adhere to them. Natural laws are there, period.
|
Adhere in the sense of obey and live in harmony with. Sorry if i misunderstood. We can either choose to live within the confines of universal laws or suffer the consequences. For example if we are sugar addicts and sugar is a toxin, then we will suffer the consequences of our decision to do that which is harmful to our biological temple. The same exists on the emotional plane where if we do something to another, that there will be consequences for such actions.
|
https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy
|
|
siLLy puPPy
Special Collaborator
PSIKE, JRF/Canterbury, P Metal, Eclectic
Joined: October 05 2013
Location: SFcaUsA
Status: Offline
Points: 15302
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 18:15 |
Guldbamsen wrote:
My hat’s off to Mike. It is very difficult to explain any of these things to anyone who has never read anything from the “other side”.
I’ve more or less completely stopped talking about these things because I am always having to explain myself to folks who’ve never read a single page of say WikiLeaks. People naturally assume that you’ve completely gone fishing...and yet fail to realise that I actually did the proper legwork myself. I read both(several) sides to X and simply chose to believe the things that seem the most plausible...which in essence sounds crazy when you first take a look at some of this stuff.
It’s way easier to shoot everything down without actually looking into it..instead of having to admit to being wrong.
Anyhoo I’m out. I just wanted to give a shout-out to the friendly canine  |
Thanks, David! You know, i'm really just sharing my conclusions. To convince you of everything i've discovered is beyond the scope of this forum. I've literally invested in thousands of hours of research to come to the conclusions that i have. I'm not only a music nerd but a nerd in generally. I can only hope to inspire others to go to the great lengths of research in order to come to their own conclusions. There is much disinfo out there for sure which is why it is imperative to navigate the field of probabilities without ever really feeling a sense of satisfaction that a true ultimate answer has been obtained.
|
https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy
|
|
Easy Money
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10669
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 10:26 |
|
This is probably not near complicated or paranoid enough for some of you, but I still think when I need medical advice I'm going to go to my doctor.
Edited by Easy Money - December 13 2020 at 17:14
|
|
Lewian
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 09 2015
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14916
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 10:02 |
rogerthat wrote:
Lewian wrote:
Obviously we're not going to convince each other here, surely not with the repeating request to do more research elsewhere. But fair enough, I can accept that not everything can be explained straight away. So I do take the hint to look around some more on WikiLeaks.
|
And who's to say how much of Wikileaks is true and how much isn't? See, obviously, all of it is not false. I don't need any evidence beyond the Establishment's desperate attempts to treat Assange as a persona non grata to believe that Wikileaks has a point. But if I am to believe EVERYTHING they say, that's just exchanging one belief system for another.
|
Of course you're right about this. Reading competence means questioning all you see. This doesn't mean you shouldn't even start to read. If we didn't read anything that might not be true, we'd know much less.
By the way, I'm not going to do Mike's job here, but if you're really interested to learn something and to make up your own mind, it shouldn't matter whether the person who first presents something to you comes over as arrogant or does it in whatever style you don't like. They may still have a point. (This one is not to you in particular rogerthat, rather general.) Probably the only thing that makes sense to think is that you may (or not) have the experience that if somebody presents something in a certain dodgy way, it's quite likely to be rubbish (which I do tend to think if people boast too much about their qualifications, what they have done, who they have met etc.). Which you can't know if generally in such cases you don't try to verify.
Edited by Lewian - December 13 2020 at 10:04
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 07:04 |
Lewian wrote:
Obviously we're not going to convince each other here, surely not with the repeating request to do more research elsewhere. But fair enough, I can accept that not everything can be explained straight away. So I do take the hint to look around some more on WikiLeaks.
|
And who's to say how much of Wikileaks is true and how much isn't? See, obviously, all of it is not false. I don't need any evidence beyond the Establishment's desperate attempts to treat Assange as a persona non grata to believe that Wikileaks has a point. But if I am to believe EVERYTHING they say, that's just exchanging one belief system for another.
I remember a video in which RT's Abby Martin talked about how the MSM brainwashes you. The problem is, the tone in which she described was literally like applying hypnosis on the viewers. 
|
|
Lewian
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 09 2015
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14916
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 06:50 |
|
Obviously we're not going to convince each other here, surely not with the repeating request to do more research elsewhere. But fair enough, I can accept that not everything can be explained straight away. So I do take the hint to look around some more on WikiLeaks.
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 05:47 |
lazland wrote:
rogerthat wrote:
I have had discussions with Mike and where I get off is when rather than receiving cogent arguments, I am asked to listen to/watch a long podcast. First off, most dystopians would agree that the bane of this age is that we are so multimedia-dependent and have forgotten how to read. So I instinctively distrust a process that asks me to watch videos so I will be convinced, sounds like indoctrination to me (the other pretext is as a born bookworm my attention span handles reading a novel/200 pager non fiction work much better than listening to somebody yap, yap and yap for two hours, yeah, really).
I don't rule out seemingly outlandish possibilities summarily. In news recently in, there is a claim that China did underreport numbers of covid cases in the early months. I use the word claim because this is a CNN 'leak' so I wonder what the agenda is, reading between the lines. I don't buy that there is never an agenda and on the contrary there often is. There are mysterious events happening all the time that we simply zone out of our mind owing to the information overload, like that Malaysian Airlines flight that simply disappeared off the face of the Earth. What happened and why do we still not know?
HOWEVER, in Mike's case, it swings to the other extreme where he has a point of view and then insists that everybody not subscribing to it is just ignorant/brainwashed. Forgive me for suggesting that that sounds like the standard defence of the indoctrinated. |
I absolutely agree with the point here about one wishing to read intelligent and varying points of view, rather than watching (in many cases extremely partisan) endless podcasts, video casts and the like.
I am extremely open to all possibilities, but I regard the endless slew of social media “opinions” to represent a very dangerous threat to democracy.
I will give you all an example. My government department, rightly, is taking a stand against racism, institutionalised and day to day. I have no issue with that. I loathe racism. However, I treat with equal disdain the ghastly “woke” liberal agenda which seeks to sub-categorise each and every one of us, and is, in fact, shockingly anti-liberal, in that any dissenting view is not merely ignored, but actively no platformed, or worse. Indeed, many people are simply too afraid to speak out for fear of disciplinary action being taken.
My national team had its (remote) annual conference a couple of weeks ago. In line with instructions driven down from on high, we had a presentation, a very long one, on modern racism and how we should be actively opposed, rather than simply anti-racist.
Where the whole thing fell down for me was the fact that the “presenters” streamed two, very long, videos, directly lifted from YouTube, so not original at all.
The first one had some gobby rapper literally bellowing at us from the screen at how we were all involved in a conspiracy to allow racism in our society. It was awful, and not something that I would ever have chosen to show. Basic lesson. Get your audience on your side before you start shouting.
The second one was a video on the history of the British banks in funding slavery. It was interesting, but also extremely simplistic, and made the extraordinary leap from past “sins” to telling us that we should think twice about ever taking money from a cash point belonging to one of these institutions because of their heinous past. So it went from being something slightly historically interesting to something which was, at best, simplistic and, at worst, ridiculous and without any intellectual force or context.
I told my manager of my feelings, because they were all asked to feedback reaction. I told him to bear in mind that I had a 25 year period as a Trade Union rep, so could hardly be described as some sport of fascist agitator.
Well, I heard last week that a different team had received feedback that the presentations had not gone down well at all, and whilst race would continue to form part of our national “conversation”, it would not be so much front and centre.
I make it a basic rule to read only from sources that have a force of intelligent and rational background. It is, IMO, the only way that you learn. |
The propaganda podcasts don't bother me as much as the slanted news media that prevails on both sides of the political spectrum. Reporting the facts was their aim at one time. Now the news media has reverted back to a government mouthpiece like the Red Scare days of old. The more that time goes on, the more it seems to go backwards.
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
Guldbamsen
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin
Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 05:45 |
rogerthat wrote:
Guldbamsen wrote:
I never know to where to start with these things unless I’m opposite a real life person so as I can better judge the recipient...but I certainly sympathise with a lot of what you write. Hell that could have been a post I made a couple of years back.
All of this is indeed so very complicated by so many factors it literally boggles the mind...which also is why I simply stopped talking about it to other people. To have a meaningful conversation with anyone, you at the very least need to know that the other person know just a little of what you are refering to....and even if they do know a little, they know a small snippet seen from a tiny keyhole....and well I end up sounding like a mad man..and I don’t want to be Bernard Marx screaming lunacy from a hill top.
Put another way: how many years have WikiLeaks been online by now? ..and how many regular people have seriously looked at it?
There are some things you have to learn/find out for yourself. I would certainly never have believed any of this stuff if someone over the net tried to explain it to me...even by way of links. |
I think Lewian's point is that when he does get engaged, he doesn't have good answers. Did you see how he clammed up when I said I was talking about THE City of London and not London city; at first he assumed I was talking about London the financial hub in general.
I do not like being underestimated and I think I speak for most people. If anybody assumes their source of knowledge is that arcane, they can have it for themselves, I don't need to hear about it. We have exchanged PMs about the Kennedy assassination and the US Deep State, so it is not like I am totally unreceptive to views that don't align with the mainstream media. Why should I believe in the American mainstream narrative anyway when I don't live there? Sitting here in India, I knew that the Iraq war for which NYT and CNN were manufacturing consensus was a fraud. We knew it before the war started and long before Bush finally fessed up about it.
All that doesn't mean I will uncritically accept a counter narrative because somebody shares the same conspiratorial tone as me. |
My post was not directed at anything or anyone in particular in here, I’m sorry if I gave that impression  My point is merely that talking about this to anyone, especially over the net, seems so futile. I could point to all kinds of different leaked papers and whistleblowers and I have tried this so many times by now...but all it really amounts to is ‘bullit-points’ for people to shoot down by way of a few Google clicks and/or merely by simple and common knowledge because we ALL know X about this part of human history. I’m getting convoluted now so I’ll stop. All I’m saying is that there are some things you need to find out for yourself. You’ll never believe it otherwise...and I certainly realise how proposterous that sounds, but I am looking back at a somewhat turbulent relationship with all of this. I didn’t magically believe in everything the first time I heard it. It sounded absolutely absurd to tell you the truth. But when the penny dropped it was almost as if I’d lost a loved one in that I felt many of the things I learned growing up and many of the things I trusted in was an illusion or a twisted take on reality. Another part of why I don’t point people in X direction is that I genuinely don’t want to colour their views beforehand. Truth be told, I would love for someone to wade all of this through, come back to me and say ‘I’ve figured it out - there’s nothing to worry about...it was just the most insanely elaborate hoax in human history’. That would make my day
|
|
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
- Douglas Adams
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 05:43 |
lazland wrote:
I absolutely agree with the point here about one wishing to read intelligent and varying points of view, rather than watching (in many cases extremely partisan) endless podcasts, video casts and the like.
I am extremely open to all possibilities, but I regard the endless slew of social media “opinions” to represent a very dangerous threat to democracy.
I will give you all an example. My government department, rightly, is taking a stand against racism, institutionalised and day to day. I have no issue with that. I loathe racism. However, I treat with equal disdain the ghastly “woke” liberal agenda which seeks to sub-categorise each and every one of us, and is, in fact, shockingly anti-liberal, in that any dissenting view is not merely ignored, but actively no platformed, or worse. Indeed, many people are simply too afraid to speak out for fear of disciplinary action being taken.
My national team had its (remote) annual conference a couple of weeks ago. In line with instructions driven down from on high, we had a presentation, a very long one, on modern racism and how we should be actively opposed, rather than simply anti-racist.
Where the whole thing fell down for me was the fact that the “presenters” streamed two, very long, videos, directly lifted from YouTube, so not original at all.
The first one had some gobby rapper literally bellowing at us from the screen at how we were all involved in a conspiracy to allow racism in our society. It was awful, and not something that I would ever have chosen to show. Basic lesson. Get your audience on your side before you start shouting.
The second one was a video on the history of the British banks in funding slavery. It was interesting, but also extremely simplistic, and made the extraordinary leap from past “sins” to telling us that we should think twice about ever taking money from a cash point belonging to one of these institutions because of their heinous past. So it went from being something slightly historically interesting to something which was, at best, simplistic and, at worst, ridiculous and without any intellectual force or context.
I told my manager of my feelings, because they were all asked to feedback reaction. I told him to bear in mind that I had a 25 year period as a Trade Union rep, so could hardly be described as some sport of fascist agitator.
Well, I heard last week that a different team had received feedback that the presentations had not gone down well at all, and whilst race would continue to form part of our national “conversation”, it would not be so much front and centre.
I make it a basic rule to read only from sources that have a force of intelligent and rational background. It is, IMO, the only way that you learn. |
Steve, fortunately, it seems, in the UK cancel culture is not so prevalent just yet. For in the US, your honest feedback could have been held against you and been reason enough to call you a bigot.
|
|
Shadowyzard
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 24 2020
Location: Davutlar
Status: Offline
Points: 4506
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 05:40 |
^ +1 to what suitkees said 3 posts above. "Carrying" doubts? No, sir and ma'am. They don't hinder movement, on condition that you can turn them into "weightless" data.  "Veritas, Credo, Oculos" 
Edited by Shadowyzard - December 13 2020 at 05:41
|
|
lazland
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 13733
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 05:38 |
rogerthat wrote:
I have had discussions with Mike and where I get off is when rather than receiving cogent arguments, I am asked to listen to/watch a long podcast. First off, most dystopians would agree that the bane of this age is that we are so multimedia-dependent and have forgotten how to read. So I instinctively distrust a process that asks me to watch videos so I will be convinced, sounds like indoctrination to me (the other pretext is as a born bookworm my attention span handles reading a novel/200 pager non fiction work much better than listening to somebody yap, yap and yap for two hours, yeah, really).
I don't rule out seemingly outlandish possibilities summarily. In news recently in, there is a claim that China did underreport numbers of covid cases in the early months. I use the word claim because this is a CNN 'leak' so I wonder what the agenda is, reading between the lines. I don't buy that there is never an agenda and on the contrary there often is. There are mysterious events happening all the time that we simply zone out of our mind owing to the information overload, like that Malaysian Airlines flight that simply disappeared off the face of the Earth. What happened and why do we still not know?
HOWEVER, in Mike's case, it swings to the other extreme where he has a point of view and then insists that everybody not subscribing to it is just ignorant/brainwashed. Forgive me for suggesting that that sounds like the standard defence of the indoctrinated. |
I absolutely agree with the point here about one wishing to read intelligent and varying points of view, rather than watching (in many cases extremely partisan) endless podcasts, video casts and the like.
I am extremely open to all possibilities, but I regard the endless slew of social media “opinions” to represent a very dangerous threat to democracy.
I will give you all an example. My government department, rightly, is taking a stand against racism, institutionalised and day to day. I have no issue with that. I loathe racism. However, I treat with equal disdain the ghastly “woke” liberal agenda which seeks to sub-categorise each and every one of us, and is, in fact, shockingly anti-liberal, in that any dissenting view is not merely ignored, but actively no platformed, or worse. Indeed, many people are simply too afraid to speak out for fear of disciplinary action being taken.
My national team had its (remote) annual conference a couple of weeks ago. In line with instructions driven down from on high, we had a presentation, a very long one, on modern racism and how we should be actively opposed, rather than simply anti-racist.
Where the whole thing fell down for me was the fact that the “presenters” streamed two, very long, videos, directly lifted from YouTube, so not original at all.
The first one had some gobby rapper literally bellowing at us from the screen at how we were all involved in a conspiracy to allow racism in our society. It was awful, and not something that I would ever have chosen to show. Basic lesson. Get your audience on your side before you start shouting.
The second one was a video on the history of the British banks in funding slavery. It was interesting, but also extremely simplistic, and made the extraordinary leap from past “sins” to telling us that we should think twice about ever taking money from a cash point belonging to one of these institutions because of their heinous past. So it went from being something slightly historically interesting to something which was, at best, simplistic and, at worst, ridiculous and without any intellectual force or context.
I told my manager of my feelings, because they were all asked to feedback reaction. I told him to bear in mind that I had a 25 year period as a Trade Union rep, so could hardly be described as some sport of fascist agitator.
Well, I heard last week that a different team had received feedback that the presentations had not gone down well at all, and whilst race would continue to form part of our national “conversation”, it would not be so much front and centre.
I make it a basic rule to read only from sources that have a force of intelligent and rational background. It is, IMO, the only way that you learn.
|
|
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org
Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 05:35 |
Guldbamsen wrote:
My hat’s off to Mike. It is very difficult to explain any of these things to anyone who has never read anything from the “other side”.
I’ve more or less completely stopped talking about these things because I am always having to explain myself to folks who’ve never read a single page of say WikiLeaks. People naturally assume that you’ve completely gone fishing...and yet fail to realise that I actually did the proper legwork myself. I read both(several) sides to X and simply chose to believe the things that seem the most plausible...which in essence sounds crazy when you first take a look at some of this stuff.
It’s way easier to shoot everything down without actually looking into it..instead of having to admit to being wrong.
Anyhoo I’m out. I just wanted to give a shout-out to the friendly canine |
Alternate realities are quite believable, but when someone acts as if they have all the answers, answers challenges by saying "do the reseach" instead explaining their argument and then claims to actually live off the grid by not being beholden to these "secret" government rules and dictates, than they are either not playing with a full deck or with a few extra jokers added in.
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
suitkees
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 9050
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 05:33 |
^This, indeed. It's that arrogant stance that puts me off: "I've read this or that, I studied, I researched, I read all of Wikileaks.... so I know better than you..." I prefer to remain in the diversity of my ignorance than find a place in the matrix or dogma of your certitudes. A long time ago Aristotle said that doubt is the root to all philospophy. I prefer the doubts of philosophy over the religious certitudes of whatever belief.
As Nietsche said: "There's no truth, there are only fablings". The Italian philosopher Gianni Vattimo translated this into our more contemporary world: "The images of the world we receive from the
media and the human sciences, albeit on different levels, are not
simply different interpretations of a 'reality' that is 'given'
regardless, but rather constitute the very objectivity of the world.
(…) It makes more sense to recognize that what we call the ‘reality
of the world’ is the ‘context’ for the multiplicity of
‘fablings’ – and the task and significance of the human
sciences lie precisely in thematizing the world in these terms." (from his book "The Transparent Society") I prefer to confront world views rather than to adhere to one of them... I doubt, and it feels good - better than "to know for sure"...
Edited by suitkees - December 13 2020 at 05:41
|
|
The razamataz is a pain in the bum
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 05:11 |
Guldbamsen wrote:
I never know to where to start with these things unless I’m opposite a real life person so as I can better judge the recipient...but I certainly sympathise with a lot of what you write. Hell that could have been a post I made a couple of years back.
All of this is indeed so very complicated by so many factors it literally boggles the mind...which also is why I simply stopped talking about it to other people. To have a meaningful conversation with anyone, you at the very least need to know that the other person know just a little of what you are refering to....and even if they do know a little, they know a small snippet seen from a tiny keyhole....and well I end up sounding like a mad man..and I don’t want to be Bernard Marx screaming lunacy from a hill top.
Put another way: how many years have WikiLeaks been online by now? ..and how many regular people have seriously looked at it?
There are some things you have to learn/find out for yourself. I would certainly never have believed any of this stuff if someone over the net tried to explain it to me...even by way of links. |
I think Lewian's point is that when he does get engaged, he doesn't have good answers. Did you see how he clammed up when I said I was talking about THE City of London and not London city; at first he assumed I was talking about London the financial hub in general.
I do not like being underestimated and I think I speak for most people. If anybody assumes their source of knowledge is that arcane, they can have it for themselves, I don't need to hear about it. We have exchanged PMs about the Kennedy assassination and the US Deep State, so it is not like I am totally unreceptive to views that don't align with the mainstream media. Why should I believe in the American mainstream narrative anyway when I don't live there? Sitting here in India, I knew that the Iraq war for which NYT and CNN were manufacturing consensus was a fraud. We knew it before the war started and long before Bush finally fessed up about it.
All that doesn't mean I will uncritically accept a counter narrative because somebody shares the same conspiratorial tone as me.
|
|
Guldbamsen
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin
Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 04:56 |
Lewian wrote:
Guldbamsen wrote:
My hat’s off to Mike. It is very difficult to explain any of these things to anyone who has never read anything from the “other side”.
I’ve more or less completely stopped talking about these things because I am always having to explain myself to folks who’ve never read a single page of say WikiLeaks. People naturally assume that you’ve completely gone fishing...and yet fail to realise that I actually did the proper legwork myself. I read both(several) sides to X and simply chose to believe the things that seem the most plausible...which in essence sounds crazy when you first take a look at some of this stuff.
It’s way easier to shoot everything down without actually looking into it..instead of having to admit to being wrong.
Anyhoo I’m out. I just wanted to give a shout-out to the friendly canine |
I occasionally read stuff that Mike links and try to have a look at things different from what I believe. In fact I tend to agree with a number of things, beginning from the fact that science doesn't generally know things as precisely as it tends to be portrayed (as a scientist I know what I'm talking about), but also that the power of most democratically elected governments (and not only those) is severely restricted by the huge and worldwide influence of corporate interests; furthermore that the economics of money doesn't quite work in the way it is usually portrayed and believed by John Smith and Maria Ventura on the street, and even many politicians.
But then what I read tends to go further and suggests a different alternative reality usually by strong affirmation coming with additional marketing babble such as "I needed to study this-and-that for ages in order to understand", "I talked to hundreds of people, scientists, ex-FBI and whatnot" that of course has no argumentative value whatsoever but just is meant to convey a sense of authority - usually what I get to read makes strong statements but doesn't provide evidence, or if it does, I could easily explain this in a way consistent with how chaotically I believe the world runs due to the specifics of the human condition and particularly the limitations every human being faces when trying to understand things, making rational decisions, trying to convince others, maybe with a view of gaining power or influence etc.
Sure much mainstream talk is filtered, biased, and often even plain wrong. But it is easy to see how come, for example as a scientist interested in science communication with some understanding for social processes, without the need of a big world conspiracy. Let's say I believe strong corporate influence exists but ultimately who is behind that will be subject to the same limitations and chaos and screw things up, and surely not be able to control the work and thoughts of millions or even billions of people who are actually interested in what's going on and wouldn't be happily manipulated without asking questions.
Regarding Covid, I just don't buy that the huge coordinating project that'd be required to manipulate enough people in relevant enough positions in science, media, government and opposition worldwide can ever be done. And look how clueless and contradictory many governments handle this (with all kinds of dodgy theories and ideas coming up as a consequence of this, which should be against their interest in any case!?) - if they'd be all puppets, one should expect the puppet masters to do better, no?
|
I never know to where to start with these things unless I’m opposite a real life person so as I can better judge the recipient...but I certainly sympathise with a lot of what you write. Hell that could have been a post I made a couple of years back. All of this is indeed so very complicated by so many factors it literally boggles the mind...which also is why I simply stopped talking about it to other people. To have a meaningful conversation with anyone, you at the very least need to know that the other person know just a little of what you are refering to....and even if they do know a little, they know a small snippet seen from a tiny keyhole....and well I end up sounding like a mad man..and I don’t want to be Bernard Marx screaming lunacy from a hill top. Put another way: how many years have WikiLeaks been online by now? ..and how many regular people have seriously looked at it? There are some things you have to learn/find out for yourself. I would certainly never have believed any of this stuff if someone over the net tried to explain it to me...even by way of links.
|
|
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
- Douglas Adams
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 04:52 |
Lewian wrote:
My impression is that many of those who understand that things are not as simple as how they look from the surface, and that not everything that comes "from above" can be trusted want to replace some kind of "official story" (which they represent as something pretty consonant and uniform but in fact is a hodgepodge of different thoughts containing hardly anything universally consistent) with their own simplistic idea, and that's when things get murky.
|
This, exactly. I read 1984, BNW etc as an early-20s guy during the meltdown (yeah, perfect timing, lol). I am pretty anti-establishment. But it seems to me that insisting vehemently on a counter-narrative as the only true version only leads back to a new Utopia of one's own liking.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 04:50 |
I have had discussions with Mike and where I get off is when rather than receiving cogent arguments, I am asked to listen to/watch a long podcast. First off, most dystopians would agree that the bane of this age is that we are so multimedia-dependent and have forgotten how to read. So I instinctively distrust a process that asks me to watch videos so I will be convinced, sounds like indoctrination to me (the other pretext is as a born bookworm my attention span handles reading a novel/200 pager non fiction work much better than listening to somebody yap, yap and yap for two hours, yeah, really).
I don't rule out seemingly outlandish possibilities summarily. In news recently in, there is a claim that China did underreport numbers of covid cases in the early months. I use the word claim because this is a CNN 'leak' so I wonder what the agenda is, reading between the lines. I don't buy that there is never an agenda and on the contrary there often is. There are mysterious events happening all the time that we simply zone out of our mind owing to the information overload, like that Malaysian Airlines flight that simply disappeared off the face of the Earth. What happened and why do we still not know?
HOWEVER, in Mike's case, it swings to the other extreme where he has a point of view and then insists that everybody not subscribing to it is just ignorant/brainwashed. Forgive me for suggesting that that sounds like the standard defence of the indoctrinated.
|
|
Lewian
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 09 2015
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14916
|
Posted: December 13 2020 at 04:27 |
Guldbamsen wrote:
My hat’s off to Mike. It is very difficult to explain any of these things to anyone who has never read anything from the “other side”.
I’ve more or less completely stopped talking about these things because I am always having to explain myself to folks who’ve never read a single page of say WikiLeaks. People naturally assume that you’ve completely gone fishing...and yet fail to realise that I actually did the proper legwork myself. I read both(several) sides to X and simply chose to believe the things that seem the most plausible...which in essence sounds crazy when you first take a look at some of this stuff.
It’s way easier to shoot everything down without actually looking into it..instead of having to admit to being wrong.
Anyhoo I’m out. I just wanted to give a shout-out to the friendly canine |
I occasionally read stuff that Mike links and try to have a look at things different from what I believe. In fact I tend to agree with a number of things, beginning from the fact that science doesn't generally know things as precisely as it tends to be portrayed (as a scientist I know what I'm talking about), but also that the power of most democratically elected governments (and not only those) is severely restricted by the huge and worldwide influence of corporate interests; furthermore that the economics of money doesn't quite work in the way it is usually portrayed and believed by John Smith and Maria Ventura on the street, and even many politicians.
But then what I read tends to go further and suggests a different alternative reality usually by strong affirmation coming with additional marketing babble such as "I needed to study this-and-that for ages in order to understand", "I talked to hundreds of people, scientists, ex-FBI and whatnot" that of course has no argumentative value whatsoever but just is meant to convey a sense of authority - usually what I get to read makes strong statements but doesn't provide evidence, or where it does, I could easily explain this in a way consistent with how chaotically I believe the world runs due to the specifics of the human condition and particularly the limitations every human being faces when trying to understand things, making rational decisions, trying to convince others, maybe with a view of gaining power or influence etc.
Sure much mainstream talk is filtered, biased, and often even plain wrong. But it is easy to see how come, for example as a scientist interested in science communication with some understanding for social processes, without the need of a big world conspiracy. Let's say I believe strong corporate influence exists but ultimately who is behind that will be subject to the same limitations and chaos and screw things up, and surely not be able to control the work and thoughts of millions or even billions of people who are actually interested in what's going on and wouldn't be happily manipulated without asking questions.
Regarding Covid, I just don't buy that the huge coordinating project that'd be required to manipulate enough people in relevant enough positions in science, media, government and opposition worldwide can ever be done. And look how clueless and contradictory many governments handle this (with all kinds of dodgy theories and ideas coming up as a consequence of this, which should be against their interest in any case!?) - if they'd be all puppets, one should expect the puppet masters to do better, no?
My impression is that many of those who understand that things are not as simple as how they look from the surface, and that not everything that comes "from above" can be trusted want to replace some kind of "official story" (which they represent as something pretty consonant and uniform but in fact is a hodgepodge of different thoughts containing hardly anything universally consistent) with their own simplistic idea, and that's when things get murky.
Edited by Lewian - December 13 2020 at 04:45
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Covid-19 and the madness of crowds
