The effectiveness of statist propaganda never ceases to amaze me. It is powerful witchcraft casting a spell of delusion over the population.
I would like to think that most people understand that the government lies. I’d like to think that most are capable of thinking for themselves. A recent public opinion survey by Pew Research Center, however, strongly suggests otherwise.
More than half of Americans (55%) said they think that the government should “take steps to restrict false information online, even if it limits freedom of information”.
I would like to think that most people would recognize the false premise of the question posed, which is that the government is both benevolent and infallible, but alas.
The grim reality this poll result reveals is that most Americans are so dim-witted that they trust the government to tell them what is true or false.
An even greater proportion, 65%, think that the Big Tech companies like Facebook and Twitter should bear this responsibility of determining the truth for them.
How can so many Americans be so utterly stupid?
What planet have they been living on for the past several years?
I’d like to know because, here on Earth, we have seen how the government has incessantly lied to us while systematically violating the First Amendment to the Constitution by colluding with social media companies to censor factually accurate information that contradicts official dogma.
The term “misinformation” in this context is a euphemism meaning any information, no matter how factually accurate, that does not align with the adopted political agenda.
To cite one obvious example, who can forget how the government sold the mRNA COVID‑19 vaccines to the public on the basis of the lie that two doses would confer durable sterilizing immunity, ending the pandemic by stopping infection and transmission of SARS‑CoV‑2?
Remember back in 2021 when Facebook prohibited people from telling the truth that the COVID-19 being issued under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) vaccines were not FDA approved, even though the FDA fact sheets that health care providers were supposed to provide to patients prior to vaccination informed that there were no FDA approved vaccines for COVID‑19?
Remember how White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on July 16, 2021, said that the government was colluding with Facebook to stop the spread of what she euphemistically called “disinformation” while herself spreading the very real disinformation that the vaccines were FDA “approved”? By her own standard, as a result, the White House should have been banned from all social media platforms.
Remember how the CDC brazenly lied that the vaccines were more effective than natural immunity? How the mainstream media’s faux “fact checkers” then propagated the CDC’s bald-faced lie while ignoring literally all the non-CDC-originating scientific literature, which had overwhelmingly demonstrated the superiority of natural immunity? How those of us who exposed the CDC’s lie were censored for telling the truth?
Remember how the bivalent “booster” shots were sold to the public by the FDA on the basis of the lie that they would “#UpdateYourAntibodies” to be specific to the Omicron variant and thus “RechargeYourImmunity” up to 100%, the truth being that they failed to do so because of the problem with the COVID‑19 vaccines of original antigenic sin?
Remember how for a long time Facebook prohibited users from sharing factually accurate information about the probable lab origin of SARS‑CoV‑2, treating this legitimate scientific hypothesis as though it were a baseless “conspiracy theory”?
Examples of the truth being censored in favor of deceitful state propaganda abound.
The majority response to the opinion poll reveals just how extraordinarily deluded most Americans are about the trustworthiness of the government.
It also reveals the extent to which most Americans are either unwilling to think for themselves or are incapable of doing so.
And freedom of speech is supposed to be one of the bedrock principles upon which the United States was founded, yet the poll result reveals that most Americans either detest this freedom or don’t understand what it means to have a right to speak freely.
Don’t these idiots realize how incredibly dangerous it is to be advocating that the government be involved in dictating to us what we can or cannot say online?
Notably, when the data is analyzed by political party affiliation, we find that 59% of Republicans understand that protecting freedom of information means that falsehoods as well as truths will be encountered on social media.
On the other hand, 70% of Democrats are so delusional and disdainful of liberty that they view it as the proper role of government to treat us like idiots whose minds are too feeble to even be exposed to alternative views and conclusions, much less to determine the truth for ourselves.
Clearly, there is much work to be done to get more Republicans to understand the importance of getting the government out of the business of censorship, but the far bigger problem is the statist belief system that most Democrats have been so egregiously indoctrinated into.
It’s what I call “the state religion”, a subsect of which is the vaccine religion.
One positive outcome of all the madness we’ve witnessed over the past few years with the government’s criminal policy responses to COVID‑19 is a mass awakening to the complete untrustworthiness of the so-called “public health” establishment and the government in general.
But a public opinion survey last year similarly revealed that most Democrats are so delusional that they have even more trust in the CDC now than they did before the pandemic.
(To be clear, I have no love for the Republican Party, either, but they have generally demonstrated far greater sanity on COVID‑19-related issues, with one prominent example being Florida’s appropriate refusal to persist with lockdowns under Governor Ron DeSantis.)
Similarly, a public opinion survey last year found that an increasing proportion of Americans are recognizing the need to respect the right to informed consent, with an increase of respondents expressing opposition to mandatory vaccination from 16% in 2019 to 28% in 2022. But the proportion of Democrats who favor violating this fundamental human right also increased.
Clearly, we have a lot of work to do yet to awaken most Americans from their self-delusion, and the hardest task in that regard will be to break the spell that most Democrats are under that is preventing them from thinking rationally.
There is a verse from the New Testament of the Bible that comes frequently to mind when I ponder the state of our society today:
The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
How can we determine who loves truth enough that they can be reasoned with? And how can we get through to people who pretend to care about the truth but who are in fact so afraid of reality that they want the government and Big Tech companies to conceal the truth from them under the ludicrous pretext of protecting us from “misinformation”?
Share your thoughts about how we can go about lifting the veil from people’s eyes in the comments below.
Hello Jeremy,
It is frustrating, but I think it is fairly normal human behavior, possibly amplified by 24/7 bombardment with information from the Internet, social media, and smartphones.
You might find this of interest: https://wordpress.jmcgowan.com/wp/the-worldview-prison/
It seems to me that only repeated strongly negative experiences contradicting the world view sometimes overcome this problem.
Best wishes,
John
Perhaps, but I would think that everyone in the country has gone through strongly negative experiences these past few years, yet so many persist in the same old worldview that caused the problem.
Hello Jeremy,
I think the negative experiences must be both highly negative, not just an annoyance, and clearly contradict the worldview. So for example in the Silicon Valley I know a number of people who worked from home, ordered food from Amazon, and really didn’t suffer much at all. In some cases their employer actually benefited greatly from the lockdowns (e.g. Amazon). Others worked for companies that got PPP “loans.” At most a nuisance, in some cases a more comfortable life for some anti-social nerds. It seemed to be people who were genuinely harmed or at high risk of being genuinely harmed, eg small business owners, who had more doubts or simply did not buy it. Granted my data sample is small.
I think some people, a minority, are unable or nearly unable to change their worldview after late adolescence.
In the US about 20 to 30 percent of the voting population is highly committed to the Democratic Party and about 20 to 30 percent of the voting population is highly committed to the Republican Party. In most cases they are born into the party and can trace the party affiliation back several generations. I’ve joked that the True Believer Democrats would elect Adolph Hitler running on a platform of genocide if the Democratic Party nominated him and the True Believer Republicans would elect Joseph Stalin running on a platform of collectivizing farming if the Republican Party nominated him.
Both parties have a world view something along the lines of my party is at worst Han Solo and the other party are Darth Vader and the Empire in the original Star Wars. Both parties aggressively blame the other when something is perceived to have gone wrong, even if the actual policy was backed by both parties
Relevant to clearly contradicting the worldview, persistent worldviews like the Democrat/Republican views usually have one or more “escape valves,” often a scapegoat or scapegoats that are regularly blamed for the apparent failures of the worldview. On top of the standard “it is all the other party’s fault” element, the COVID lockdowns were marketed with a built in “it is the people who question the lockdowns etc. who spread the disease and death” escape valve.
John
John,
You make more excellent points. Indeed, one of my own pro-lockdown family members described the experience of not going to work and instead catching up on home projects as the time of his life. At the same time, his family experienced the trauma of being absolutely terrified of SARS-CoV-2. So this is what I mean when I say I think we have all been traumatized in one way or another. Those so afraid that they favored lockdowns just had a different type of trauma than those of us who were horrified about the lockdowns.
I personally have a hard time understanding why so many Americans are so stuck in the whole false “left vs right”, “Democrat vs Republican” mindset that renders them so incapable of thinking outside that tiny little box.
It seems to me that once a “stupid” belief is inculcated, a person’s intelligence will turn to reenforcing it. Paradoxically, “smarter” people are better at maintaining and defending their “stupid” beliefs. Or as Micheal Shermer says…
“Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons.”
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/47788.Michael_Shermer
The article John shared above makes a similar point:
” In fact, highly educated intelligent people may be more prone to it as they are better equipped — like a good lawyer — to rationalize away obviously contradictory data or experiences.”
This is off-topic a bit, but I followed your article and aligned with the pursuit of the truth, but then felt derailed by the biblical reference.
I am unsure if you are a Christian, but it is strange to read thru and see the chastising of belief, but then to be followed with a biblical reference from a book of beliefs. It seems kind of ironic.
Not that bits of truth cannot be found in the fiction of JK Rowling also… But, I find it strange to make fun of a belief system that denies reality, and then to conclude with a biblical verse and the allusion in your writing to “lifting the veil.”
Again, not sure if I am reading your intent correctly, I just find it a strange juxtaposition. Please correct me if I misunderstood the intent. Thank you
Lee,
I am not religious. I just feel that there are insights into human behavior that can be gained from the Bible, and I have a particular fondness for that passage. I cannot tell you whether you misunderstood my intent because you didn’t explain to me what you presumed my intent to be.
You answered my question. I was pointing out the interesting part of challenging one’s “state religion,” as it was named in the article, but then the conclusion with a religious narrative from the bible… Where we challenge one’s “beliefs,” to only follow with our own. But again, you stated that was not your intent. It may just be me getting caught in the religiosity’s version of “truth.”
For me… It is a strong opening about searching for truth beyond belief, but the end quote from a book a beliefs weakens the statement as it is speaking of Satan/God, and otherworldly deception. For me… it was a strange ending that took away from the strength of the argument
I’d also like to ask you about your “terms of use” for the comment section. (Please bear with me as this is on topic with the discussion/your article and articles from the past.)
You talk consistently about censorship, and this article has a picture of a computer screen that says “censored.” (Which makes sense as the censorship and control of information shapes narratives and these systems of belief that are hard to break/as referenced in the article)
But I wanted to point out your “terms of use.” Particularly this… “All visitors are welcome to post comments to articles. Debate is welcome and encouraged. Understand that you do not have a right to comment on my website. It is my website. Your ability to comment here is a privilege that I grant to you, and if you do not abide by my rules, your privileges may be revoked.” (Then followed by a list of rules/regulations to follow.)
My overall question is… Is this not censorship? If we complain of big tech companies controlling narratives of discussion, how can we do the same? Are we not the kettle calling the pot black? Why is it ok for us to table any discussion, yet criticize those that do the same? Thanks for your time
Lee,
Of course it is not censorship for me to establish rules conducive to fruitful discussion. There is nothing self-contradictory or hypocritical about my terms of use for this comments section. Moderation is not at the same thing as censorship.
So were the social media sites “moderating?” They removed content according to their own motives they believed where good… Wouldn’t yours be doing the same? Can you please explain the difference? Thank you for your time
No, social media cites have not been merely moderating. First of all, their aim was not to create rules conducive to fruitful discussion. Their aim was to prevent discussion about certain topics. Second, what they do is censorship because they have been preventing people from sharing factually accurate information in service to the government and its political agenda. There is no parallel whatsoever between me establishing terms of use for the comments of my own site and what the social media companies have been doing.
Prohibit State sponsored public education.
The result of prohibiting state sponsored education would be widespread illiteracy.
We’re already there David.
David,
I cannot agree that in the absence of the government school system, children would receive no education. There is homeschooling, and obviously schools would not cease to exist.
That belief is the result of the social conditioning from schools. The true history is that Americans were more literate before compulsory schooling started in the 1850’s. Farmers taught their children well, so well that the reading material they could comprehend would be too difficult for today’s supposed well educated. Please see John Taylor Gatto’s _The Underground History of American Education_. Also consider that children today are growing up in the information age, for the first time in history they have the ability to access answers to almost any question and multiple ways to learn almost anything outside of a brick and mortar school.
Thanks for the book recommendation.
https://www.amazon.com/Underground-History-American-Education-Investigation/dp/0945700040/
Michael, can you say more about how that would work? I’m guessing you are okay with the idea that all American children should receive some sort of education before the age of 18. (If not, please correct my assumption.)
So the question is: who should provide this education? If it’s parents, no child would ever receive a better education than their parents received, and most would probably receive something a little worse, considering few parents have the time or skills that professionally trained teachers, who earn their living teaching, have. If every child was home-schooled, American literacy/intelligence would enter a downward spiral.
In addition, home-schooling parents have to get their curriculum and supplies from somewhere. Currently, they rely heavily on private profit-seeking or religiously motivated non-profit corporations. While some of these might be at least partially effective with things like reading, math, science, and history, I cannot wrap my head around how they could be better at those things than public schools, which can be held accountable when parents and communities pay attention.
The same point applies if every child attended a private school. The expensive, exclusive ones provide a good education, but most exist to make profits for their owners, or to indoctrinate the kids in some specific (divisive) world view.
Absolutely we need to do more to hold public schools accountable, but abolishing them would make accountability nearly impossible.
Where does my thinking, from your perspective, go off track and can you articulate how abolishing public education would bring about improvements?
K McKim,
Your argument that no homeschooled child could receive a better education than their parents is a non sequitur fallacy. I would argue that our son is already receiving a better education than I did as a child, and the possibilities for him to expand his knowledge far beyond my own are endless.
I also reject your argument that if every child was homeschooled, literacy and intelligence of children would plummet. I see absolutely no reason why the opposite wouldn’t be true. (Setting aside the problem of not every parent being able to homeschool for the sake of the hypothetical argument.)
I also reject your assumption that buying curriculum from a company that creates curriculum for profit is somehow problematic. On the contrary, the profit motive would drive curriculum creators to constantly produce ever more effective materials. Ditto for private schools.
I do not understand why you cannot imagine how children could do better at reading, math, science, and history in the absence of a government school system. Our son is a perfect example. At the age of a first grader, he was reading at a fifth grade level.
I view the indoctrination that children receive under the government school system as a huge contributing factor to the problem I described in my article above.
Michael,
I agree that the government school system is a huge part of the problem. This is one reason why we homeschool.
It will take people being told that the NASA Apollo lunar missions were faked by robotics, low earth orbit for our current technologies to keep astronauts safe, and movie magic. This happened six years after JFK was assassinated and perhaps this will awaken those believing everything the TV says is true. http://flybynews.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/moon-landing-hoax/
I posted an excerpt from the above article and linked to it, plus there’s an embedded video of RFK, Jr. speaking at the Iowa Fair recently. “RFK, Jr. Iowa & Critical Awareness Lunacy?” https://flybynews.wordpress.com/2023/08/14/rfk-jr-iowa-critical-awareness-lunacy/
Jonathan,
Thanks for sharing!
Many authors on human behavior, including Freud, Jung, and Rogers have observed that humans think primarily with their hearts and their intuition, and only secondarily with their intellects. In fact, Jonathan Haidt, a professor of moral psychology at NYU likens moral reasoning to an elephant, representing the intuitive moral sensibilities, being rode by a small rider, representing the intelligent side of our nature (see The Righteous Mind). The elephant obviously has the greater power, but the intellect attempts, often feebly to rein in the great beast that lies below. In a study he did of educated and relatively uneducated people, he found that the more highly educated people were distinguished by their capacity to come up with more rationalizations for their moral arguments than the uneducated, who took their own perspectives as “naturally” or “obviously” true. In addition, unconscious differences in moral sensibilities to people, particularly those that separate people politically, tend to make them reach conclusions that “make no sense” to someone with differing moral sensibilities. It is difficult to get through to others with differing moral perspectives because the moral sensibilities underlying them are unspoken and usually unconscious. They seem to be “obviously” true to people who have them. What is interesting in today’s world is that Haidt’s observation is that conservatives tend to value respect for authority, loyalty and honoring the sacred far more than liberals, yet liberals these days evince far more respect for authority, loyalty and honoring their sacred “woke” creed far more than conservatives. Liberals far more than conservatives want to support Biden, support the Ukraine war, support the power structure, and follow what government instructs them to do than conservatives nowadays, who feel that government authority violates higher morals, such as the Constitution, religious principles, and other higher moral principles.
I think a lot of it has to do with tribalism, which is kind of a religion or cult — stay loyal to your tribe because you don’t want to be ostracized by them, because you have faith in them, and because you have learned to detest the enemy tribe, and everything they believe in. In this kind of hatred, the media has schooled people well. I highly recommend reading The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt.
Mark,
I agree it is very much a religious-like or cultish tribalism at work. As to the point about more versus highly educated people having more capacity to rationalize their arguments, it could also be argued that the more highly educated one is, the more deeply indoctrinated, whereas common sense among the masses lets them know things that are “obvious” that the intelligentsia try to gaslight them about. An example is the ostensible need for central banking.
I think people are directed mostly my unconscious interpretations, directed by the ego.
I would suggest that when a super-evil enemy is designated, and the danger from them harped upon every day, then the default position of the population, or most of it, is “we are the good guys so I’ll give our experts and government officials the benefit of the doubt”. “If they say so-and-so is necessary, even if it sounds a little fishy, I’ll go along with it because we could always change our minds and reverse our position later”.
When later comes, however, it i too late.
Peter,
Yes, but this is a reiteration of the problem that so many people trust the government to tell them what to think. Do you have any thoughts about what to do to solve this problem?
I think it speaks to the level of unconsciousness in the majority. Upleveling awareness is a massive undertaking, and I believe is a result of a personal wakeup call combined with a strong degree of self-motivation. Most are not up for the task, and you cannot make the horse drink at the well. This pattern is not new. What is new is the tools of destruction are more efficient today. I think it is a huge waste of energy for a few people to invest in changing the collective mind. Self-work and aligning with likeminded people to develop alternative systems will be productive.
“Remember back in…”
Colin Powell at the U.N. convinces the world Saddam has WMDs is is just about to blow the fuses.?
Peter, yes, the lies told by the government to sell the Iraq war are a perfect example of the role of what I call the “state religion”.
I value my questioning ability and my ideas of always thinking for myself. You can trust nothing coming from government, big tech or any institution. You almost have to start with questioning everything until they or it can prove to you that they can be trusted. Most will not. Or, you will get some A/I cowflop that is completely invented.
Even in my circle of friends i am unable to convince them of truths… i believe more corruption needs to be seen so they will see for themselves… they have no critical thinking and have been brainwashed by the media……i pray for them
Gail,
There is so much pervasive corruption, we cannot wait for the corruption to grow even deeper for people to see the error of the faith they place in government. We must find ways to get through to them and open their eyes to the depths of the corruption already staring us in the face.
Think about how many people won’t make changes to their life-style to improve their health or prolong life. It can be excessively uncomfortable to believe that which implies you need to come out of your comfort zone significantly for longer term benefit. And creature comforts are addicting. Life-style changes are hard. Similarly, world-view changes can be hard. They can adversely affect your self-esteem and/or make you more pessimistic about the future.
I, for one, am pretty pessimistic about the future because of what I believe. But I also believe that there’s a more distant future that will be better than it otherwise would have been for my having lived a rational life. That’s what makes the difference for me.
Since you brought up the New Testament passage, consider the one where Jesus said via a parable “if you don’t believe the law and the prophets, you won’t believe if someone is raised from the dead” (my paraphrase). Same idea being expressed – life-styles, and the comfort that goes with them, are addictive.
Jeff, the analogy to making lifestyle changes is a useful one, I think. Indeed, such changes like changes of paradigm can be hard. And, yes, the process of making such changes can be hard, but once people overcome the challenge of it, they can find renewed confidence, self-esteem, and optimism for the future.
https://i.postimg.cc/pT0SqDrc/Some-People-Would-Not-Know.jpg
Think about the terms that everyone who took the shots agreed to.
https://i.postimg.cc/HnZQhfcM/Sponge-Bob-The-Deal.png
Thank you for the elucidation of the issue(s). I believe that many are not dimwitted but instead have become complacent and lazy. You share a sad commentary but such an accurate portrayal of deception and more. Thanks again.
Sue Ann Dunford
Sue, to be clear, I did not intend to communicate that most people lack intelligence but that they lack the ability to think critically — or, as you point out, the will and desire to question things and put in the effort required to seek truth.
Infelizmente você está certo, parece que o mundo é governado por uma mídia vendida! Como é nos EUA é no meu país Brasil, temos um PR ladrão que foi condenado em 3 instâncias, é incrível e assustador como a mídia e o STF dominou nosso país, a mídia independente está sendo presa e tendo seus canais banidos!
Maria, I’m providing this Google translation for those of us who don’t speak Portugese!
“Unfortunately you are right, it seems the world is ruled by a sold media! As it is in the USA, it is in my country Brazil, we have a PR thief who was convicted in 3 instances, it is incredible and scary how the media and the STF dominated our country, the independent media is being arrested and having their channels banned!”
It all begins with a proper Classical education. After this true knowledge can only be obtained through self-study of the substance of things. Upon first meeting someone I always ask “what was the last book you read?” The minute of silence before answering tells all.
David,
I don’t read many books much myself anymore, but that’s just because so much of my time is spent consuming primary source materials online (including the medical literature).
How would you rate the government school system at providing what you regard as a proper classical education?
I agree wholeheartedly. My one concern is the language we use to try to sway the delusional towards the truth. I’m a liberal to my core, have always voted for democrats…until Covid. If I put myself in their mindset while reading this, I probably would stop reading after being called stupid and delusional. I realize they can click on highlighted text which I assume proves your case, but most will not dive that far. We need soft language and hard facts in the actual text. Mentioning at least one reason or study that they couldn’t easily refute, may cause them to then dig further to see for themselves. I know the article here isn’t necessarily intended for the truth-challenged reader, but many times I want to share things, but don’t because of the language used. Democrats do see themselves as superior thinkers for the most part, and don’t take seriously any article, tweet or post that calls them idiots. They will dismiss it, no matter how well written and factually accurate. But other than that, you’re preaching to the choir here. I no longer consider myself a democrat. Their values have shifted away from human rights for the individual, to human rights for those who agree with “us”. Sorry, but I can think for myself.
Jana,
I completely agree. Most of my articles are intended to persuade those who hold a different view (as well as to provide intellectual ammo to those who share my view). The above article is a rare example of one intended to preach to the choir. It’s a rallying cry to those of us who aren’t completely blinded to the true purpose of the censorship regime to brainstorm how to solve this problem.
I’m more than happy to write another article written with more diplomatic language to get through to Democrats and others who actually trust the government to tell them what is true or false!
On the COVID issue the opinion of many people is shaped by the medical doctors, who quite often understand the situation, but exert some king of Orwellian doublethink, lest they run into unpleasant consequences.
Carlo,
Yes, indeed, in addition to the problem of people blindly trusting the government to tell them what to think, there is the problem of people blindly trusting other “authority” figures like their doctor.
We learned in my household that the path to health required us to STOP listening to the doctors and to start trusting our own better judgment.
I asked myself the question, why are so many Americans (Canadians, Germans, etc) so stupid and can’t or won’t think rationally for many, many years. It bothered me so much that I could not reason with people, facts would not sink in at all.
Then, a few years ago I came across the work of Dr. David R Hawkins, MD, PhD, in particular his book ‘Power vs Force’.
He essentially argued that rational thinking represents a fairly high level of consciousness and that only a relatively small percentage of the population is even capable of such rational thinking. He assigned a scale from 0-1000 for these different levels with reason being between 400-499. I think he wrote that only about 10% of the population are capable of rational thought and that about 50% can’t tell the difference between truth and falsehood. So the results of that poll you mentioned convey.
Of even greater interest and surprise to me was that love and joy calibrated even higher than reason (500-600). The highest calibration according to Hawkins was enlightenment (700-1000) and he said that the very few people on the planet that have reached or were born with that level of consciousness (maybe 1%) were in effect counterbalancing the great majority who were calibrating below 200 (shame and guilt calibrated at 20 and 30, fear at 100.)
Anyway, his work helped me to come to some sense of peace with others who could not see logic or reason, I accepted that they were simply not capable of it, but without arrogance. If the Earth was a school they were still in Kindergarten or early elementary school and who can blame a young child for not being able to think rationally. So it is really a spiritual issue and that’s alright, at least with me now.
On the plus side, David Hawkins also found that the level of consciousness of the world’s people in general is gradually increasing. So there is hope. Working on raising one’s own level of consciousness with meditation and focusing on love and understanding may help to raise consciousness for everyone!
Hi Anke! Nice to hear from you. I am not convinced that most people are simply not capable of reason because of some inherent deficiency in their level of consciousness. I think that most people are intelligent enough and that their brains are capable of it, they just DON’T reason because they choose NOT to train their minds to do so.
When you add the percentages of various personality disorders together that means there is a large swath of society that will be impervious to the facts or investigating the facts. Try getting past the normal ego defenses of the average person to get them to concede they were wrong, the armour reflexively goes up instantly, again they become impervious to the truth. The average person does not value or pursue truth to the extent needed to become humble, admit a mistake and open their mind to opposing information.
Siobhan,
Indeed, a significant proportion of the population has some kind of personality disorder. But I don’t think this is the major factor explaining the poll result discussed in the article. It’s estimated around 1% of the population are psychopaths, for example, and 3% are sociopaths, but while pretty alarming in themselves, those numbers don’t come near to explaining the imperviousness to facts we see in the 55% figure.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head, though, with your observation about the average person not valuing truth enough to be able to admit errors in thinking or worldview. It is more a problem of close-mindedness, I think.
We need reformation in this country. Only when people stop bowing the knee to what they view as the messianic State and instead bow the knee to Jesus, will we be set free from this mass delusion. Of course, not everyone who sees through the government’s lies regarding COVID is a Christian – and sadly, many Christians fell for it – but in general our society worships the State as a false god. Satan uses this to do what he does best – promote lies so that people will trust anyone or anything other than God. People who are fearful are vulnerable and tend to trust any entity that is offering hope, which is why so many willingly took the vaccine and obeyed the lockdown orders. But those who fear God – not illness, government, or even death – already have eternal hope in Christ and do not need to turn elsewhere for it; He has given them the ability to be discerning and to know the truth, and as the Bible says, “the truth will set you free”. So we fight for freedom and know truth is based on a holy standard, God’s Word – not the arbitrary dictates of our governing bodies.
Kristen,
I’m not personally religious, but I completely agree with your comment about most people worshiping the state as a false god. Indeed, I frequently use the term “state religion” to describe this problem. A subsect of the state religion, of course, is the vaccine religion.
Well, a bunch of ideas. First: who do we think we are that we need to lift the veil from peoples’ eyes? People like my old Pa would say, “I don’t recall asking for your opinion.” And then he would ignore y’all.
Then there is that “echo chamber” phenomenon: the people who think you are calling them stupid will shut you out and you will only reach people who already agree with you, so you won’t be lifting any veils; you will end up “preaching to the choir” or those with their veils already lifted. Net: no change achieved.
In my experience as a chemistry teacher and teacher of many other things, my challenge was to convince students who were solidly convinced that they could not do math (or other challenging tasks) that they actually did have some ability. There was no way I could lift their veil. I had to prod them to examine themselves and their ideas and point them to things that would allow them to throw off their own veils.
Enter the Socratic method:
“The Socratic method (also known as method of Elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate) is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presuppositions.”
So I would ask how they came to the conclusion that they could not do math. I would then get a list of traumatic experiences with mathematics and, quite often the name(s) of particularly bad teachers. The first opening! “So Mr. Crabbe told you that your were terrible at math and you believed him?” Then a pregnant pause. Then I start asking math questions, beginning with some pretty simple stuff. When the answer is correct, I escalate the level of difficulty a little; if the answer is not correct, I throw out little clues to engage the “bad math” student in a thinking process. I don’t give them time to hesitate and they don’t have enough time to remind themselves that they are bad at math. The exercise ends when we reach a level where they have demonstrated to themselves that they actually CAN do math and “Mr. Crabbe” was incorrect.
If you can change someone’s mind, it probably isn’t worth changing. If you can stimulate them to think and they change their own mind, then that is solid progress.
The math lesson thing is a simple demo. It’s a little trickier when you get into more abstract thing, but review that part about the Socratic method. It’s a decent guide.
Most efforts to undo the work of propagandists is not going to be a sprint; it’s going to be a marathon. Be prepared for resistance, disappointment, failure and slow progress. It’s a worthy pursuit, but it will be punishing. I hope that every once in awhile you will see someone catch on fire with enthusiasm and launch into an orbit to help change the world. There aren’t many rewards, so savor the ones you witness or receive.
Indeed, in this post, although it is not typical for my writings, I am preaching to the choir as opposed to trying to get through to those advocating censorship. Your suggestion to approach such individuals using the Socratic method is excellent. The trick, in my experience with this method, is to trigger thoughts to help them overcome their own cognitive dissonance. And, yes, it is going to be a marathon.
Persist in promoting the truth over and over and over again
Yes, this is critical! I have found that too many people are too hesitant to stand up and speak out, and I understand how difficult it can be to be confrontational, so gaining the knowledge and learning to articulate arguments well to address government and mainstream media misinformation is key.
In the late 1960s, I was discussing the JFK assassination with a wise and skeptical friend. He told me about the Zapruder film and why he believed the mainstream narrative was wrong. “The scales fell from my eyes” as they say, and I started seeing through all the official lies from then on. In fact, when I came downstairs the morning of 9/11/2001 and saw my sister-in-law crying in front of the TV, I watched for a minute or two and asked “What have those $@&&$&! In Washington done to us now?” It’s been like that ever since. Apparently I’ve been permanently red-pilled. For me, it was like zen enlightenment. It came upon me unexpectedly and undeniably but I can’t say how or why. So, I’m not sure one can convert those who adhere to mainstream viewpoints. Perhaps some psychological shift must happen that’s more religious than logical. Just my 2 cents.
Bee,
You might be interested in browsing my writings on 9/11:
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/?s=9%2F11
Particularly on WTC 7:
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/?s=wtc+7&et_pb_searchform_submit=et_search_proccess&et_pb_include_posts=yes
My wife and I were discussing this concept as it applies to our young adults getting married, raising children, and how in the world did we ever get through that. This is what we came up with:
Proverbs 3:5-6
New International Version
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding;
6 in all your ways submit to him,
and he will make your paths straight.
This is how we learned to be a successful couple and parents. Add whatever else we learned from our parents and that is the answer. We learned nothing from the government or the legacy media.
Without the word LORD, you get a substitution of THE WORLD today, and that seems to us to be the problem.
Americans aren’t the only people who are stupid, and a big reason for that is all the toxins in the air, food and water, including microwaves and all other forms of electromagnetic pollution which our bodies are not at all equipped to deal with, especially our brains. Everyone is stressed out, and stress interferes with thinking, emotions and every other natural function. There is really no way we can protect ourselves adequately from all that, so we are ALL being dumbed down, not just “the masses”. But Nature has its own way of dealing with the messes that humanity makes of the planet, and we can expect to be hearing more and more from Nature in a big way.
Natalie,
I’m glad you brought this up. When I was drafting this article, I wrote a tongue-in-cheek remark about it maybe being the fluoride they dump into the water supply, but I ended up cutting it as I didn’t want to open that whole can of worms. But one reason for it, I agree, is all the toxins people are bombarded with daily.
Stress I am sure is another major reason. People don’t do their own thinking because that requires doing your own research, and who has time for that? It can be exhausting.
I wish it would become standard practice whenever quoting results of a survey to always give both the percentages and the actual numbers up front, with a brief statement of methodology. In this case, a little more than 5,000 Americans are being used to represent about 320 million.
Three big factors influencing Americans ability to think are pharmaceutical drugs that affect the brain (many Americans take them – how many of the 5,000?), electromagnetic radiation exposure from massively increased wireless use known to impact all biology, including the human brain (Martin Pall PhD, world’s foremost authority on the biological impact of nonionizing radiation on the human body, estimated about 5 years ago that the human brain has about 5 years left of normal function), and a brainwashing mainstream media.
Democrat media is far worse than republican media (although the latter is also not perfect), and it could be that the media is the major cause of the differences in the survey. Unfortunately, we don’t know how many of those surveyed take mind altering prescription drugs and how those who do take them, answered. That is an important piece of information needed to evaluate the result.
Linda,
Indeed, I question whether any such opinion survey can be considered representative. How do they randomize it? I actually hope in this case that it is NOT representative. I took for granted that it is.
All the toxins people are bombarded I am sure is a factor, and EMF radiation may be, as well. We take steps in our household to shield and otherwise minimize our EMF exposure.
CALIFORNIA IS COMMUNIST COUNTRY — HATE IS EVERYWHERE
California is about the last state I would personally want to live in.
Isn’t factual information that does not align with (harms) MICIMATT political agendas euphemistically termed “malinformation?”
“… when conversing with fools, one senses an interaction is taking place with the slogans, catchwords and memes which they have obsequiously embraced, rather than with sentient beings. By abandoning their independent judgment and integrity, fools have allowed themselves to become spellbound, blinded and consequently misused and exploited by scoundrels. Having thus willingly become a passive instrument, the fool will be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil, now passionate and complacent in an exciting new role, raison d’etre or calling. Herein lies the danger of the diabolical exploitation by scoundrels upon fools that threatens to do irreparable damage to us all.”—Dietrich Bonhoeffer
They call it “malinformation” when they admit that it is true. When they falsely claim that it is false, their preferred euphemisms are “misinformation” or “disinformation”.
… sono un insegnante di scuola superiore (pubblica) qui in Italia … navigavo sul sito di Paul Craig Roberts e mi sono imbattuto su questo suo articolo, a tal proposito, confermo che anche qui Italia abbiamo lo stesso problema, ovvero … una scuola che applica la censura alla critica, che mette il silenziatore alle domande e ai dubbi legittimi e per di più si fa megafono di ben determinati interessi, orbene questa non è più scuola bensì palestra di manipolazione e di indottrinamento … la soluzione è che la scuola e gli insegnanti devono avere completa autonomia e tutte le posizioni anche quelle che non ci piacciono debbono avere pari dignità, dopodiché sono gli alunni che sentite tutte le posizioni si faranno un giudizio libero da qualsiasi condizionamento a favore o contro una tesi … d’altro canto la scuola a casa dove si insegna quello che ci piace e si denigra quello che non ci piace, ripropone lo stesso schema che critichiamo, . insomma la scuola deve essere libera da qualsiasi interesse e condizionamenti, solo così si fa VERA SCUOLA 😉
Domenico,
I’m providing this Google translation for those of us who don’t speak Italian 🙂:
“… I am a (public) high school teacher here in Italy … I was surfing the site of Paul Craig Roberts and I came across this article of his, in this regard, I confirm that here too Italy we have the same problem, that is … a school that applies censorship of criticism, which puts the silencer on questions and legitimate doubts and moreover becomes a megaphone for well-defined interests, however this is no longer a school but a gymnasium for manipulation and indoctrination … the solution is that the school and the teachers must have complete autonomy and all the positions, even those we don’t like, must have equal dignity, after which it is the pupils who, having heard all the positions, will make a judgment free from any conditioning in favor or against a thesis … on the other hand, the school house where what we like is taught and what we don’t like is denigrated, proposes the same scheme that we criticize, . in short, the school must be free from any interest and conditioning, this is the only way to have REAL SCHOOL 😉”
A couple of years ago I was asking myself the exact same question. I could not believe how remarkably fast and willingly educated, poor, classy , trashy, American people were believing things that were absurd. I have pondered this question over and over. We can’t just take one factor as a cause. I believe we need to sit down and look at ALL the factors. Once we have a better understanding of how some of these factors are intertwined, we will be better able to see what areas or patterns are prominent and need to be targeted. Oddly enough, I hear no one talking about this. We need to get a group of people together to try and figure this out. A group (vetted) Scientist, psychologist, therapist, health advisors, and a diverse group of people who have been asking the same question. I really believe that if we don’t get an understanding, followed up w/action, the outcome is not going to be good.
Jody,
I agree we need to take a holistic approach to solving this problem. Factors identified thus far in the comments are:
– the mainstream media’s propaganda function
– the government education system
– environmental toxins
– EMF radiation
– high daily stress
“The masses have never thirsted after truth…”—Psychologist Gustave Le Bon
My mother said that it hurts to think.
A friend said to me: “I don’t care if 9/11 was an inside job. I won’t believe it anyway!”
The mass exodus from reality is the fee to live in fantasy land, free from the responsibility to grow up and become a mature human being. The 1% gas their engines with mass delusional disorder. Even if 90% of the people suffer from this malady, the 1% still has to contend with the 9% that are not easily taken down. The 9% know that the 1% are terrorists, psychopaths that have no chance of successful mental treatment.
The 9% are therefore left to conduct counter-terrorism operations.
The key is planning. There are so many trip wires that every individual can take advantage of. Psychopaths are easy to predict, like the early video game, Packman. Packman has only one job. Devour everything in sight.
Allow constitutional and inalienable rights to be your guard shield.
Good luck.
Bo
I think it is true that many/most people prefer to live in a delusion simply because they find it more comfortable than living in reality.
I learned that lesson speaking out against the Iraq war. Prior to the invasion in March 2003, I was sharing information with family and friends showing how the government was lying about Iraq having WMD.
I thought for sure once people saw the information clearly exposing the government’s lies, they would join me in opposing the war. Instead, what I found was that people were upset with me for sharing the information, and I heard things like:
– “You are un-Christian”
– “You are unpatriotic”
– “None of us want to hear any of this information”
– “I am sure the government has evidence to support their claims, but they just can’t reveal it because it’s classified”
It was pure blind faith in government. That was a very important lesson for me to learn at the very start of my journey into doing journalism.