Of course, a true conspiracy unfolds because the masses are unaware. The masses are gaslit if they start catching on.
But in the absence of compelling evidence, it’s pointless to wildly speculate about from my perspective.
I try to guide people to truth, and sometimes it means finding another’s blindspots. I treat all perspectives and emotions behind them as valid.
Most people who get exposed to this sort of stuff tend to get very traumatized. They are potentially misled by people who stand to profit on them.
Maybe there is an inkling of truth to their perspective, or a very valid overarching feeling to discern and point out to them that validates their strong feelings about a subject. A critical insight that puts them at ease, that doesn’t cause flight or fight.
They think they are truly informed and they are sobered by what their known reality has turned into. You don’t help a paranoid, suspicious, and traumatized person by name-calling them or assaulting their beliefs as invalid.
A common element behind many conspiracy theories is distrust of government. Why can’t we trust the government? I was raised loosely with the idea that it is supposed to be by the people, for the people.
I want to address that distrust in my life and hopefully play my part in co-creating a true democracy here on this planet. It’s a lofty goal, but it won’t stop me from doing my best.
There are compelling inklings and inconsistencies to that event, it’s more than fair to point out and talk about if you have specific insight and questions and an interest to do so.
Just because I may not personally be curious enough to seek out that information or dive deeper than I already have, doesn’t mean I wouldn’t approve of discussion or thought.
My disinterest lies in the fact that I don’t believe I would be able to gather or consolidate the evidence and make any meaningful conclusions - doesn’t mean someone else can’t. I don’t advocate for blind trust or faith of anything.
There are plenty of events that raise legitimate questions and concerns - like suspicious, high profile deaths that are immediately ruled as suicide. Question on, I say. There are no stupid questions and thoughts as far as I’m concerned. And all perspectives are valid, even if I may personally not see it the same way - everybody is free to hold their own positions.
For me, I’m just not interested in dredging up the past unless it’s absolutely necessary. I like pointing out facts that have been buried or hidden to the vast majority of people. If I was older, I feel that I’d be more confident to speak with authority about various events that are still relevant to learn from today - it’s just difficult for me to discern the truth due to the sea of propaganda at times. I’m more interested with interacting and engaging with the present.
Doesn’t mean I still don’t look back to educate myself and others when necessary, no matter the difficulty - I certainly don’t shy away. I try to get an overview first, and then I dive into every detail that I can possibly find, I try to look at different perspectives and viewpoints, and then I read specific resources or accounts. Eventually I’m able to feel confident that I’m close to the truth.
And I’m fine with being called lazy or naive, I’m just focusing my energy in a particular way that others may not approve of - and I’m not specifically looking for approval. I’m interested in truth and I’m interested in progress.
Of course, a true conspiracy unfolds because the masses are unaware. The masses are gaslit if they start catching on.
But in the absence of compelling evidence, it’s pointless to wildly speculate about from my perspective.
I try to guide people to truth, and sometimes it means finding another’s blindspots. I treat all perspectives and emotions behind them as valid.
Most people who get exposed to this sort of stuff tend to get very traumatized. They are potentially misled by people who stand to profit on them.
Maybe there is an inkling of truth to their perspective, or a very valid overarching feeling to discern and point out to them that validates their strong feelings about a subject. A critical insight that puts them at ease, that doesn’t cause flight or fight.
They think they are truly informed and they are sobered by what their known reality has turned into. You don’t help a paranoid, suspicious, and traumatized person by name-calling them or assaulting their beliefs as invalid.
A common element behind many conspiracy theories is distrust of government. Why can’t we trust the government? I was raised loosely with the idea that it is supposed to be by the people, for the people.
I want to address that distrust in my life and hopefully play my part in co-creating a true democracy here on this planet. It’s a lofty goal, but it won’t stop me from doing my best.
I think that is lazy and naive. For example, is it really pointless to speculate about the official explanation for, say, the deadliest mass shooting by a lone gunman in American history?
There are compelling inklings and inconsistencies to that event, it’s more than fair to point out and talk about if you have specific insight and questions and an interest to do so.
Just because I may not personally be curious enough to seek out that information or dive deeper than I already have, doesn’t mean I wouldn’t approve of discussion or thought.
My disinterest lies in the fact that I don’t believe I would be able to gather or consolidate the evidence and make any meaningful conclusions - doesn’t mean someone else can’t. I don’t advocate for blind trust or faith of anything.
There are plenty of events that raise legitimate questions and concerns - like suspicious, high profile deaths that are immediately ruled as suicide. Question on, I say. There are no stupid questions and thoughts as far as I’m concerned. And all perspectives are valid, even if I may personally not see it the same way - everybody is free to hold their own positions.
For me, I’m just not interested in dredging up the past unless it’s absolutely necessary. I like pointing out facts that have been buried or hidden to the vast majority of people. If I was older, I feel that I’d be more confident to speak with authority about various events that are still relevant to learn from today - it’s just difficult for me to discern the truth due to the sea of propaganda at times. I’m more interested with interacting and engaging with the present.
Doesn’t mean I still don’t look back to educate myself and others when necessary, no matter the difficulty - I certainly don’t shy away. I try to get an overview first, and then I dive into every detail that I can possibly find, I try to look at different perspectives and viewpoints, and then I read specific resources or accounts. Eventually I’m able to feel confident that I’m close to the truth.
And I’m fine with being called lazy or naive, I’m just focusing my energy in a particular way that others may not approve of - and I’m not specifically looking for approval. I’m interested in truth and I’m interested in progress.