too tabloidy, I like more finesse in my propaganda
calling them soft intellectuals makes it look like they don't know what they're doing which is false to say the least. the problem with our percption of ongoing events is that we try to correlate it with history, that was thaught to us incorrectly. whether we like it or not, civilizations were not build by romanticized buccaneers or clueless men in general. someone has and always had a plan
one of these things is not like the other! it's an old trick, I noticed they do that often
there are few remaining recordings of Lenin's speeches, but I remember reading somewhere that in the words of his contemporaries his speeches were short and simple. what a comedy. he was a puppet
and re-build an internet
you lost me there, fren
bizarre, but yeah that's how they get us. it's no silly illuminati conspiracy theory, when there's real time and resources going into those things. it's not accidental
good find
I like to watch vlogs, where people describe some internet or pop-culture phenomenon that basically consumed them in their childhood. it's all about nostalgia and very innocent, but they never fail to mention something that put them off, a disturbing episode of a show or a freakish behaviour of someone online involved in the community they were a part of, that made the whole thing go belly up. the events they describe really defy logic, yet they sit there trying to rationalize it with some quip like "people are crazy these days". a quick example regarding furries, if I remember correctly around 2000's an anonymous user created something like a furry MMO, that allowed you to customize your furry character and interact with others in the game. it was free, and supposedly fan made. do I need to point out how suspicious that is, considering the amount of coding knowledge and skill that would be necessary to launch such a project? there was no controversy that I heard of, other than the fact that the anonymous dev just disappeared overnight, and the game closed. I assume that meant stage 1 was completed, and it was time to move onto stage 2, because I'm sure soon thereafter new furry communities started popping up, forcing these children into a more and more degenerate interaction with each other. this may not seem related, but these both cases reek of a very similar mode of operation, a creation and obviously planned destruction of a community - mess something up, only to offer even more messed up solution. accelerationism at it's finest
nah, our ancestors were fine. if we talk raving schizos, from a cursive look at the book summary and its excerpt, it's more likely that the author was larping as one
controlled opposition comes to mind. then again, isn't everything controlled? so for whatever reason they block us, let's just hope we're not the baddies
interesting! I've been wondering recently in whose name they crashed it. war is a great opportunity to get rid of the undesirables - no one takes the blame or asks any questions
I remember my surprise when I heard of James Tilly Matthews' case, because no matter how you look at it, it indicates that there's some underlying truth to this delusion. back then I thought it lends itself nicely into panpsychism, assuming that we all operate on a common consciousness frequency, and the schizophrenics have a broken "receiver", that catches too much noise, creating patterns that overwhelm them. now, I'm not so sure any more. maybe James Tilly Matthews did actually stumble upon what he described? the closer you look at the history and current events, the more you turn into the archetype of the fool. in renaissance literature court jester's laughter had an underlying note of knowledge, that came from his closeness to the king. he was one of the courtiers, but unlike them, he was in a position that made him able to voice things, no one else would have dared to point out. perhaps a few centuries back James would have become a jester in some nobleman's court, on the account of his endearing straightforwardness? understanding historical depictions of madness can be quite eye opening, and I'd recommend to put more trust in studying them than in reading the current DSM
go see an optometrist, if you can't tell by just looking at it