Fucking hell
(media.conspiracies.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (38)
sorted by:
I'm a fan of Ron Paul, but a thought occurred to me the other day: in his long career as a truther (of a sort) he has never said something like,
"Hey everyone, you know you simply cannot take at face value what you see in the news and the history books. Stories, photos, and even videos can all be faked, and it gets easier every day. It's not that everything is phony==far from it-- but you should always be allowing for that possibility. You need to be willing to examine it for yourself, or at least be acutely aware that you're taking someone else's word that it's real."
Personally, I conclude that Ron himself does not actually think this way. And I further conclude that that, in itself, is a weakness and a failure of a sort.
I remember RP almost a decade ago saying something along those lines. Said something like; media is owned by a few people and should not be taken as 'the truth'.
There's a finer but vital point.
I was just recalling how controversial the whole "grab 'em by the pussy" incident was. Only one person I'm aware of, Jim Stone, suggested it was faked. Given that it came from a member of the Bush family, was recorded by a "hot mic" then saved and only released many years after the fact, not making sense as a phrase in common use or practical application, required only the alteration of one word, and seeing the phenomenal technological progress in A/V fakery since then, it is as close to a "conspiracy" slam dunk as you can get.
Although I'm sure there are a few somewhere, no conspiracy theorist I ever saw accepted that thesis. The story has since then become more bedrock a "fact" than the Moon landings. So what precisely is going on?
It's one thing for Ron Paul to suggest that the media is biased. People may agree or disagree, but at least they get what's being claimed. Trump hits far closer to the mark when he calls something "fake news". No public figures come out and say, "You aren't living in the Matrix with a cable in the back of your head, but your Reality is--in many respects--just as artificial. Here are some examples...."
To be frank, I don't think Ron Paul is actually aware of the things I've just said, but I think Trump is.
Further, as we can see, it has been easier to convince many conspiracy theorists that they are, in fact, living in the Matrix with a cable in the back of their heads.
I think people like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich and even Mike Gravel were/are all keenly aware of the deception in the media. There are interviews here and there where they skirt around things.
But they are also all senators/congressmen who have to play that very fine line to stay within public discourse and not be seen as wacky. Alex Jones can get away with it because he may or may not be a CIA asset.
...or maybe I'm wrong and they're totally duped too, or unknowingly live in a duality of their own minds. It's tough to say.
I think Trump Derangement Syndrome runs both ways. That "assassination" attempt was staged as hell and Orange Man is so vain he didn't even let people surgically remove a realistic chunk of his ear to make the thing believable ... and yet the MAGA cult believes it.
I just think we've been in a 12 year long WWE/WWF match and Orange Man is going to make all his supporters own nothing and be happy about it. MAGA-retards like Tim Poolboy are praising the current stock crash. Soon they'll be clamoring for a Digital Dollar, but "no this one isn't a CBDC! It's fine and libertarian because it's Private!"
Going back to Ron Paul, at least right now he's totally opposing the absolutely stupid shit that Republicans are doing and not holding party lines. But maybe that doesn't even really mean anything at this point. 🤷♂️
I have found that what actually goes on in the vast majority of people's minds--they way they actually work--is more subtle than that they are duped on various issues.
That is, "duped" implies that there is some information hidden from them, and that if they were made aware of that information, the true situation would become clear. That does not seem to be how it works in almost any situation.
To go back to the original post and incident, the question is how many people, when hearing about it, asked themselves whether it was real or fake? That's basically a rhetorical question and you can come up with any answer that pleases you.
If I was to answer the question and give evidence that even one single person besides myself evaluated it on that basis, I could not produce a single shred. Whether or not anyone agrees that it was fake is not the point, it is whether the question even formed in their mind.
Taking the purported incident in Yemen, I would assume that anyone who had a strong reaction to it also believes that to some extent Trump is a liar. So why didn't they ask themselves whether Trump was lying about this? Because they saw in what was presented to them that which they wanted to see and reacted to it in the way their subconscious dictated. That's how it really works, apparently.
So as I summarize the whole situation, I would characterize it not as people being duped, but as living within a level of consciousness where they create their own reality, rather than always seeking the truth. Of course, seeking the truth means you often find out how wrong you were, and that's the last thing people want.