There is a strange idea hovering about that if you don’t know something then it doesn’t exist. Kind of like the image of the proverbial ostrich with his head in the sand. But it goes beyond denial. Ignorance is when you don’t know something at all, denial is when you know it, but you ignore it. What I am talking about here is when you
Just a quick response to a most enjoyable essay – thank you.
I think most of us are cowardly most of the time; it’s a survival thing.
Hence, we automatically categorise the size of the opposition and back engineer our response accordingly. For example, if the opposition is far more powerful than us we immediately find an excuse not to challenge it and we swiftly move away. If our opponent is weak/vulnerable, we know we are safe to squash it and then boast of our prowess.
However, I think karma sorts things out eventually.
Normally, I would make mention something about sheep and their talent for not hearing what they don’t want to hear or not seeing what they don’t want to see, ignorance as stated by Todd, however, as I’m sure maybe a few of you out there might agree, this act of trying to help sheep understand things from a different angle and if you miss judge the line of acceptability just slightly, to the point where you are shut down as a conspiracy theorist, tin foil hater and so forth. And once labelled, anything you say after that is obviously laced with nonsense from their point of view. So I chose to just put out there what has helped me get through the enormous amount of information in a quicker and more efficient manner.
Nice article! It does remind me of when I was telling my wife about how my dad used to drive us to kids and my mother at the ages of 9 and 11 (no pun intended) up to the farm in his van where our seats were the wheel wells, the outer casing around the wheels that protruded into the back cabin, there were two sets, one set upfront the others in the back in between a lot of rolling space on the floor and some extra fun, the challenge off shifting toolboxes and steel metal rods to duck and be mindful of trying to find your seat (I use that word so loosely) again once being knocked of the wheel well bump, happened at least a few times during the 50km trip on back roads . I always thought a handle would’ve been a nice touch, however we all have our hopes and dreams I guess sometimes they’re just too big. Obviously talking about seatbelts is a bit of a joke in such a scenario. However my sister and I are both still alive and have all our limbs. and we made it through all those summers planting trees on the farm oh I remember one time is about 5000, parents did seem to get a bit more out of their kids back then, back in the day, in my opinion, work wise not lip.
I think one of the things we need to become better at is being able to filter information quickly, and establish whether the writer has any useful information to give. This takes practice, also your gut will give you a pretty good idea right from the get-go whether this is something that is following an agenda or has truth behind it, videos are even easier I feel. I find myself skimming a lot more, as we don’t have enough time to take it all in, however I believe there are strategies in order to make the best use of out time. Perhaps adopting some of these might be better than just dedicating more time to it. Just a thought I had that I thought I would share .
I grew up in the 1950s, when the manual for the Gilbert Chemistry Set had instructions for making gunpowder and nitroglycerine. I made gunpowder a few times. The man at the drug store (not sure if we even called them pharmacies back then) would not sell me the chemicals. Thanks to him, I am still alive. The gunpowder was fun though., and fortunately I still have my limbs and eyes.
I don't know how dangerous my 1978 chemistry boxed set and sturdy microscope were but after a short bit I moved on to the really risky life habit of book reading.
The issue of denial is something I think about a lot . I look around at those who I would refer to as sheep and I know that many of them are aware ( some a lot some a little) of much of the truth eg Covid etc. I have come to believe that they do not have the emotional bandwidth ( strength) to confront fully what is in front of them.
A dear friend and 9/11 scholar died yesterday. He did manage to finish a remarkable book just a few weeks ago. I will post it shortly if I can find it. It illuminates so much of the despicable CIA corruption! Great post Todd!
At this point, it's safe to assume that whatever the official government position is on any given subject -- then the opposite is true. And I don't say that "tongue in cheek." That's why you hear people say that things are upside down. It's not just social issues, it's damn near every issue. Every event, and it's not by accident.
Here's one of my personal favorites. Giant toxic cloud over Palestine Ohio, it looks like some shit from Ghost Busters, The Apocalypse, whatever. Government says, it's safe, you can return home. Then the CDC's own employees, sent there to check toxicity levels, start getting sick. This is AFTER people were told to return home.
The Chinese balloons weren't sending data, the military made sure of that. Then a few weeks later, "The balloons were transmitting data..."
I could go on endlessly.
Not having time to research every issue; when in a pinch, assume that the government position is total nonsense, you'll be right more times than wrong.
If the government is lying to the public constantly in order to avoid scrutiny, what the hell are they actually doing? And why are they so worried about the public finding out? These simple questions are never answered without research.
I have a book written by Mark Zepezauer from 1994 titled The C IA's Greatest Hits and he explains the main purpose of intelligence agencies is to carry out covert operations involving economic warfare, rigged elections, assassinations and genocide.
The sheep could do a lot better than the "La, la, la, la". Since they enjoy having a darkened mind to facts and truth, I suggest the more infantile "I know you are but what am I".
Libertarianism is also part of the problem. Many just want to be left alone to do their own things, but that means they do not engage in the fight for a decent civilization.
Nice post, Todd.
You write: " I mean, do we really have the time to check everything? Well, now I think we have to make the time, and, of course, not everything is important enough to require vetting it for truth."
Yes, unfortunately every institution is corrupted and so are all public-facing experts. I think you will like Roosh's take on this point: https://www.rooshv.com/why-do-i-need-to-know-everything
You also write: "What I am talking about here is when you know something and do not deny it, but simply rationalize it away with a statement like “they must have a good reason for doing that,” or similarly, “maybe we don’t know all that there is to know about that.” Which is often followed with, “and I don’t have the time, (inclination, care, interest, curiosity, ability, intelligence, etc.) to look into it further.”
This is the Gell-Mann amnesia effect as explained by Michael Crichton: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#GellMannAmnesiaEffect
Curtis Yarvin argues that the Gel-Mann Amnesia effect is rational because the costs of generalized dissidence is too high for most people. He states, “Given Conquest’s law—‘everyone is reactionary on the subjects they understand’—many adopt a craven, but all too human, corollary. After taking a bold stance in their own specialty, they have no stomach for any other fight. Reactionary enlightenment in one field should cast Bayesian doubt on other fields. Instead, local enlightenment reinforces global ignorance. Logically, the specialist should reason that if his own field, which he knows closely, is corrupt, other fields which he cannot examine in detail may be corrupt as well. But emotionally, the cost of a general dissidence far exceeds the value of extending the inference. The sweet spot is general compliance, local dissidence.”
Lastly, I would ask the extent that most people have *any thoughts at all*. The concept is astonishing, but according to a 2007 University of Nevada Department of Psychology study on college students, regarding the frequency of common phenomena of inner experience (inner speech, inner seeing (aka images), unsymbolized thinking, feeling, and sensory awareness), only between *22% to 34% of the individuals studied had frequent internal dialogues*: http://hurlburt.faculty.unlv.edu/heavey-hurlburt-2008.pdf
Curiously, though, I’d think a lot of the supposed sheep (especially in the more liberal, or traditional lib? bent) would agree with you on the absurdity of many of the American-led wars in the Middle East. Especially because many (or at least some?) tend to be far more anti-anti, and even anti-American-rule (or anti-colonial).