A Closed System

There is so much going on we don’t know about. Like I’ve said before, we definitely have reached that critical point of being a “closed system.” The media are all in on it, so they control the flow of information. No one knows what is happening unless they literally see it or experience it. It is fascinating how if you don’t receive reliable information about what’s going on, you really don’t know at all…even in your own neighbourhood. Remember the Nazis would come and carry people away in an apartment building and no one there would know, MAYBE one person, the person living next door, but that’s it. They would just disappear. And only the people who KNEW them would even know that.

There could be people all around us dying, being persecuted for this or that, and no one would know it. And then stuff happening in the next city, or in Europe…no one knows ANYTHING reliable now unless they see it with their own eyes. Once a free press is gone, we are totally blind. Very few people seem to know this or accept it if they know it.

Obviously some of us know more than others. That’s because we look for other news sources other than NYT, CNN, WSJ or WP, or whatever other mainstream media that inundates us with junk, untruths, and lies. We are lucky to still have alternative news, and even that isn’t always reliable. The sheep have been trained to believe the alternative news is all conspiracy, misinformation, and hogwash at best. I won’t even say what they believe “at worst.”

The brainwashing that has been going on for decades dictates if information is contrary to what the accepted authority says, then it is a conspiracy theory. It is not even considered. For example, if someone says, “I don’t believe much the Washington Post says because I think the people who own the Post (Bezos) has their own self-interests as a priority.” Even though that statement makes perfect sense, most people listening would say, “oh that’s ridiculous, you are a conspiracy theorist, that’s paranoid.”

Why? Have these people ever read a history book? Is there some law, or police force, out there that keeps newspapers (for one example) from going into the hands of people who may have an agenda, even a personal one to become wealthy and powerful? Is there something in place that would guarantee that would never happen? Of course not. People certainly do not have a problem believing Trump is conniving and deceiving. They have no problem believing the Republican Party is conspiring to destroy democracy and the Constitution of the United States. They have no problem believing that everything Fox News reports is a lie and a slave to special interests. Why are all these examples the ones to hate and not trust? That question does not have an obvious answer; it is actually quite complicated. But the question should be asked.

I’ve talked about the news found in newspapers and other media being a problem. I think most of us would agree with that. It is interesting, however, just how big that problem has become. One thing I have noticed even from my amateur sleuthing regarding mainstream media: they are quite selective in what they report. Sure, this has always been an issue with mainstream news, they have all kinds of criteria regarding what they believe is suitable for print in their pages. But it seems, over time, that they have special interests regarding what they will print and what they ignore. And pretty much they are all leaving out very important stories that do not fit into their narrative.

As the days flip on by, the United States, and most of the “free world,” has been slowly becoming a closed system. Other, obvious, closed systems of the past include the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Communist China, and a plethora of other “not so free” nations. This means that the only reliable information outside of our personal inner circle can only be had through alternative media, which is not very well funded, and often does not have access to news as the big boys have. I have to say alternative media does a damn good job considering these obvious restrictions. Just imagine what information we would have at our fingertips if these journalists had the funding to really get out there and get the news.

Think about the bubble we all live in. Most of us (I imagine I am accurate here) do not have information beyond our family and close friends. Many of us don’t even know all that much about our neighbors. If we have a death in the immediate family, or even the distant family, we probably will know. But how much detail will we be privy to? What about a next-door neighbor? What about a “not so close friend?” We may hear about it, but will we know things like “were they vaccinated, did they have any pre-existing illnesses, were they some  or other unhealthy lifestyle?” Our “circle of awareness” is actually rather small. And until it is large enough to overlap other circles of awareness we really don’t have much information to work this. In other words, if we don’t hear from news sources that are committed to reporting news that is pertinent and trustworthy, we really will not know much until these circles of awareness spread out without too many gaps between them. We just don’t have access to information.

Regarding the “died suddenly” phenomenon, unless a sheeple personally knows people who have suffered this untimely demise, they simply will not know it has happened. Besides that, they generally believe that if the mainstream news sources are not covering these stories then even if they DO hear about it organically, there is less likelihood they would believe it or pay much attention to it. If their circle of awareness were broad enough, they then would hear first hand about families who are suffering these sudden deaths of loved one, and then it would not matter as much that the mainstream news was not covering it. They would then have their own personal experience of the events.

Must we wait until every family has had first hand experience of these horrific deaths?—or until mainstream media starts to take these things seriously and include such events in their news coverage? Unfortunately probably so.

Considering how other aforementioned countries have fared once their information systems were closed, we are not in a good situation. What makes this different for us is that there is a relatively healthy flow of information from other, untainted, sources that we have access to. But part of the agenda has been to block as much of this as possible through censorship and poison the rest through the “disinformation” campaign, which is nothing more than a form of sophisticated censorship. Although much of this information is there, it is not read or listened to or watched because it is considered by most to be trash and at best to be ignored, at worst to be actively attacked.

Once a system is closed, there really is little chance of going back unless some radical event takes place. As said earlier, if the sudden deaths get worse, people may break out of the “if I didn’t hear it on the mainstream news, it didn’t happen” syndrome. Or if due to some miracle the mainstream news wakes up and starts reporting actual news and not propaganda. We are at the point in this agenda where only people like those reading this article are privy to what is really happening in the world. Maybe not everything in the alt media we read or see is 100% accurate, but it is closer to the truth than what the news within the closed system is reporting.