Look at your username and remember why you chose it. We both know this isn't about smut, don't we?

Haha, yes, this thread is starting to get out of hand a bit.

It's a very interesting thought about this backwards reasoning. Instead of honest evaluation and reaching honest conclusion, normie mind starts with the assumption "I'm a good person" and then goes through simple programmed motions "obey authority, listen to the experts" in order to justify it.

Other interesting thing to observe and which I've had first hand experience with is that some normies seem to trade obedience with morality. I won't go into details, but one of the most ardent covid cult follower I happen to have acquaintance with is also quite immoral in their personal life. So, it seems that at least some normies feel to have already justified by their obedience to authority and no longer feel the obligation for moral actions in their personal life.

I'm afraid I don't quite share your optimism regarding Trump though... Not to bash him or anything, but it seems he's also just a part of the establishment. Sure, decorations might change, their tactics also might change, they might even have some in-fighting going on, but I think he's one of them. Possibly always have been. There is no hope in political solution. Especially not in a person of a single man. That's all kabuki theater and psyops within psyops within psyops peppered with constant distractions in order to get public eye off the stuff that really matters.

There is a logic in what you're saying. I'm just not as optimistic as you, I guess... Also, Q is one of the most finely executed psyops in human history. I, for one, would definitely not seek truth in that direction.

Well, there you go. It's already here. I guess one of the main problems is that masses somehow still assume that government works for their benefit. No, it does not! Fuck me! How many more proof do they actually need? Oh, yes, covid and all the rest of that stuff was bad, but now suddenly government cares about us and our children!

When the masses will finally wake up to the reality that anything government does is for entirely different purposes than those stated, then we'll probably have some glimmer of hope appearing.

I absolutely agree with you. Of course they do not want free internet. Of course they want it totally controlled with ID only access eventually. They start with adult sites and adult content. Then they'll move to social media (it's harming children! won't anyone think of the children?!). By that point 80-90% of users will already be ID identified at all times and that's basically their goal.

How can anyone with half a brain not see that this has nothing to do with protecting anyone is beyond me.

His point is that this is not really about gaming or protecting anyone. I actually agree with him. This is certainly about creeping tyranny. Of course it is. And, no, I do not have Steam or Itch.io accounts, so at this point it is not affecting me directly.

Part of the Big Program and the reason this is a Big Secret is to keep people from developing to their highest level.

That's for sure. For example, one of the main tasks of general education is not to make people smarter, more capable or more independent, but more uniform, manageable and predictable. Predictability bit is also one of the main reasons why it's compulsory.

Mark describes three basic human operating modes as "service to self", "service to others", and "service to the truth".

This is interesting. Haven't thought about it that way. It seems that most normies usually operate under either "service to self" or "service to others" modes. The elites, of course, operate almost exclusively under "service to self" with some occasional and very limited "service to others" ("others" in regards to their in-group whatever that may be).

To go back to the previous example of Bill Maher and the mid-level consciousness, he believes he's fighting the brave crusade of progressivism, freeing all the oppressed masses or some such thing.

This got me thinking about covid thing again. The system was quite invested into duping normies that they are some kind of brave fighters and life savers. All they have to do is just wear a mask and stay home. There were even ads portraying them as some kind of superheroes and whatnot. When being confronted about this, usual normie reaction was very similar to what you described Maher's reaction was: "Don't you know we are the good guys? We don't have time for all these conspiracy theories! We are too busy saving lives and larping as superheroes here!"

See how--with precision--we can deconstruct the morality here?

I've seen Firefly. A very long time ago. In any case, it's a good example. Yep, doing the right thing does not guarantee a favourable result. Or, one might say, you'll never know what the actual result will be. It might be favourable in a long run (as in my previous comment). It also might be not so favourable.

Probably the best way to say it is that if you look around, none of the problems we see are by their design.

Yep. I've also used this argument. Usual counterargument is that the masses have allowed it to happen. They have allowed the elites to lure them into consumerism, laziness, selfishness, believing the lies etc. My reply to that is that the masses have been conditioned to be this way. They've been conditioned for all their lives almost on a daily basis. It's no wonder they've turned out as they have. Besides, the elites are more to blame in any case, because it is they who are doing this and not the masses. Even if we do place some blame on the masses as well, I'd say it's about 70/30 or 80/20 with the elites being the most guilty part.

If you read the Book of Ecclesiastes...

Haven't read it, but I'm familiar with the general outline of it. The king in question was Solomon, if I remember correctly.

Yep, it is what it is. I agree.

The horror and disgust of the Western society is that everybody is truly believe in capitalism and all that shit about democracy and freedom regardless of political color.

Yes, and that's kind of an issue. Soviets were not that good at lies and deception. People went along with it, but only publicly. In private few of them did. Current regime is different in that regard. Most normies will defend it even in private.

You really should. Mark Twain was in soviet school schedule...

I do actually have Huckleburry Finn and Tom Saywer books on the shelves. Just checked. It's a Soviet edition from 1970. Imagine that! I guess I'll check it out some of these days. In fact, I do not recall reading anything by Twain. Might as well pick up Sawyer or Finn.

...there are caveats like wealthy people who are public figures who are also dependent on the system (entertainment, media, sports, politics, etc). Or wealthy intelligent people in STEM who are also dependent and have to tow the line.

Well, that's why most of the stars and media people fell in line quite nicely and told us to stay home, wear a mask and take a jab. Only those who could afford it or simply didn't give a fuck went against the system. That goes for doctors as well. Most of the big name doctors who exposed the scam were already retired or soon to be retired.

Your third category applies to the 1% businessmen and moguls...

Not only those. Moderately well off are less dependent on the system as well. There's a big difference between having a property and some savings which would allow to live without a job for a while (or to relocate somewhere else, as an option) and living paycheck to paycheck while being constantly hooked on mortgage and various other loans.

The system strives for totalitarian control and fights people who are not dependent on it on any level...

Yep, that's for sure. I was referring to the level we have as of right now. In the future they indeed plan to completely eliminate middle class and create only two classes: ultra rich technocratic elite at the very top and everyone else - unwashed masses completely dependent on the system at the bottom.

I think it's both. "I'll just believe in what was told by MSM to make my life easier".

Yeah, but that wouldn't be a real belief. You can't simply tell yourself to believe in something. You either believe or you don't. It is not entirely voluntary process. If you simply tell yourself to believe in something, that's just make believe.

It's from famous Twain The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, chapter 23

That's a nice one! I haven't read Huckleberry Finn. Didn't know about this.

Ah, but you see, all of them have already been arrested and those you see on the screen are just clones! It's simple, really. Besides, all those bombs falling around the world are just cleaning operations. They are cleaning out those damn tunnels! White hats have already won! MAGA!1!1!

Yeah, I remember that bell curve. It was an interesting phenomena to observe. Additionally we can analyze this from perspective of relationship to the system and income levels as well:

1. Mainstream normies can be seen as most dependent on the system. They have quite a lot to loose. They have mortgages and other loans. Their jobs are dependent on their social standing which in turn is dependent on their ability to keep consumption level on par with their peers.

2. Those at the lower end, as you mentioned, have much less to feel grateful for, so they are already kind of opposed to the system by default. Also, they have less to loose than mainstream normies and they are not so dependent on their social standing either.

3. Higher ups, however, are less dependent on the system because of their wealth and/or intelligence. They might have a lot to loose, but their gain or loss ir more due to other factors, not their relationship to the system. In short they are more free to choose what to think, what opinions to have as well as their lifestyle and location.

Although we both kind of conflate intelligence with wealth, which is probably not entirely correct... There are lots and lots of dumb rich people as well as intelligent but not that well off ones.

That's a good breakdown on human thought process. In particular states of human consciousness: NPC, mid, awake. I guess this whole thread is about the middle one. How many of them are out there and what exactly keeps them sticking to the mainstream. Also, is it something outside their control or is it more like calculated effort.

That page assumes that for the important task of determining objective reality, every human being follows a rational process. That is unstated on the page and unconscious in whoever wrote it. And it's wrong on every point.

Absolutely. It's almost automatic to assume that everone else's thought process is similar to your own. Which, of course, is not necessarily so.

So from that we find that for them, there is no objective reality or--for that matter--objective morality either. Things are true because they need to be true at that point in time. Even the concept that reality needs to be real has no inherent importance.

This is a very good point. Regardless voluntary or not, conscious or uncionscious, this is one of the things that separate normie mindset from what we could call critical one. Bendability of reality and morality. Sure, I can pretend for a while to believe that reality is not objective, but innately I will still stick to the idea that truth is objective and it simply cannot be otherwise.

Another interesting thing to ponder (assuming, for the sake of the argument, that this choice is clear cut and voluntary) would be: Which strategy is better? Is it better to live your life as if there is no objective reality, morality and truth or to live it as if there is? Hmm... At first sight it might seem that normie strategy is better. They can bend whatever current situation requires which supposedly gives them huge advantage, but is that really so? Human mind is simply incapable to calculate all possible future paths. Constantly switching and bending to supposedly winning strategy puts not only huge pressure on an individual, it also opens the mind for various outside manipulations. It is much less stable mind state than always sticking to objective reality no matter what. A very simple example could be the same old covid and vax. Sure, from normie viewpoint it is much easier to just follow the rules, get the poke and recieve priviledges. However, in the long run it is of course a gravely disadvantageous strategy. For each individual on their own as well as for humanity collectively.

It's like being angry at an engine for malfunctioning after some a-hole intentionally put the wrong kind of fuel in it. The anger is not going to help and you're angry at the wrong thing anyway.

I think I agree with you on this one. Even if they do technically have a choice, their mindset is still a result of lifelong conditioning, brainwashing and whatnot else. Although there might be some degree of blame on the mainstream part as well it is still the perpetuator who is the actual guilty party and not the victim.

Besides, it is a very slippery slope. For example, just recently I read a post the idea of which was essentially that the masses deserve what is coming for them. That they themselves have invited it all with their dumbness, consumerism, selfishness, laziness etc, etc. At the end of the post it was even assumed that TPTB are doing almost a good job of sorting wheat from chaff and stuff like that... Damn, this line of thinking really does stink of being a psyop. I could totally imagine elites injecting this kind of gaslighting into the masses in order to demoralize them and put said elites on some kind of moral high ground or something.

I think one of the main differences is that back then it was mostly external thing while now it is external as well as internal. It's inside the heads just as much as outside of them. Also, current regime is better at keeping good public image. Soviets were not that great at such levels of deception and lies as we see today. Yep, it seems they've made considerable progress indeed.

That too is a factor, but probably not a major one. At least not yet. No one will know if some normie, say, criticizes vaccines in private conversation. We are not quite there yet... but we might be at some point in the future.

Free assembly and association are powerful means for people to realize they're not alone, and that's what those in power fear most.

That's why they're working hard on dividing everyone as much as possible. Ideally they would like a population that does not have any direct communication between people at all. A society where only communication occurs exclusively through the system, to the system, or mediated by the system. Sadly, to a large degree, they have already succeeded...

I agree with you on digital censorship, but I do have some doubts whether this is a correct way to go about this. Suppose some lawyer really does achieve some tangible result. Ok, that would be good... for a while... but the system as a whole still remains under their control and besides direct censorshipo they have many, many other ways to control the narrative. General task for them currently is to get everyone on their smartphones and dependent on the system as much as possible. When most of the people will no longer be able to exist without digital communication on a physical level, well, that's when they'll make their final move. I might be mistaken, but as of now it seems that any purely digital solution is a lost case from the get go.

Ah, I see. Good post. It is hard to imagine it's really possible to reduce everything to simple biochemical process, but who knows... at least partially it really is possible. I think emotions have already been simplified for large part of population. They are still there, but more bland, shallower than they used to be. Simpler, less complex.

I think the real question here is this: How large part of the normies (goyim) really are not sapient and how large part of them kind of are, but have chosen to participate in the circus willingly? They can't all be biochemical automatons, can they?

I think I know what you mean and you could be right. Usually we assume that for most people thought process is more or less the same, but that might not be the case. In other words, NPCs really might exist.

Yep, that's exactly what I meant. Really believing something is not quite the same as simply going with the narrative because this or that reason.

Those are some good points. Was it you who recommended Julian Jaynes and his book The Origin of Consciousness? Well, whaddayaknow, I did actually read it! Found it very thought provoking as well. Thanks!

This time, however, my idea was that while large part of normies really might be incapable of independent thought outside their percieved authority, perhaps for some other part it's more like cold calculation and not literal wiring of their brain. Like, they don't really believe in mainstream narrative, but have decided to go along with it (and go along hard, even in private) because that way they can recieve some perks from the system. For example, because it's easier, there's less social pressure that way, because they want to have a carreer in some normie-only profession... etc, etc...

I guess the main difference here is in the process itself. How exactly this outsourcing of thought process happens. Was it conscious or unconscious? Was it more like a choice or more like a literal wiring of a brain? Things like that.

Smart ones carefully draw this picture by themselves, adjusting it to be consistent and logical as they acquire new knowledge about world, others just blindly copy what MSM paint them.

Yep, seems like it, but do those who blindly copy actually believe in it? Or it's more like cold calculation? Something like: if I follow the mainstream my life will be easier and more comfy so I'll follow it no matter what.

Haha, didn't know it's called like that. I think most of the shitty overpriced and unnecessary stuff thrives on this phenomena. Throw in some influencers to advertise your stuff and hamsters will never admit they just spent tons of money on useless stuff they don't actually need.

I don't see it as active support, more like how Russians acted under Communism.

I've thought about this example as well. On the other hand, back then there was this thing called kitchen talk. In public people really did pay minimally required lip service. In private, though, it was kind of a badge of honor to expose your actual views in one way or another. In public was one thing, but in the kitchen, eye to an eye, well, that was a whole another thing.

It's not quite so in this case. Most of the normies will defend mainstream lies in public as well as in private.

They’re not intelligent enough to make a conscious decision.

Hmm, I'm not sure this is a question of intelligence... To see through (most of) the lies you don't really need a lot of intelligence... It's more like willingness to step off the beaten path. Readiness to not do as others do. Something along those lines...

Covid really was one of the most transparent scams ever perpetuated, you could see things not being quite right with a naked eye, without any deep research required whatsoever... and yet, most of the population went along with it...

...if they crave security and acceptance they will believe anything...

Yeah, but will they actually believe? Or will they just make believe?

...because your success shows their failure, and their failure is due to cowardice.

I've noticed it too. You can't fully express your views, your values and your position not because it's wrong or false, but because it exposes lack in other party's views or values. I often tone it down a bit. Sometimes unconsiously, sometimes consciously. People don't like being pulled out of their comfort zone. If you do it too quickly they'll switch to defense mode and once they do, nothing else matters anymore. If they are in defence mode no arguments, proof or even common sense won't work anymore.

I can't say I hate them though. I used to be angry, but now I'm just sad, I guess... Sad that humanity has turned out the way it has.

Yes, cowardice. In OP I mentioned not caring, but there might be a lot of other reasons as well. Cowardice, laziness, social pressure (which should count as cowardice, I guess) and so on... One reason in particular could be cold calculation. Those people are probably even worse than cowards.