We Tried To Tell You

puttefnask's picture

The Media's Final Humiliation | 1791

You've been living in a dream world.

keanu reeves 90s GIF

3.285715
Average: 3.3 (7 votes)

Comments

stokkebye's picture
puttefnask's picture

Deciding whether to click a link, which you may have posted as an attempt to bait me into a conspiratory discussion, seeing that it comes from a website called "collective-evolution.com" makes it very easy for me not to click it.

 

You can reach the same conclusion as most conservatives did about Trump, without having conservative views or be a Trump fanboy, by being source critical and objective.

 

You can do it by reading the same articles that you've most certainly already read, by being slightly more particular about what the words in all those articles, over the last two years actually said, and what they did not say.

From that slight upgrade in your critical ability, a pattern appears. A pattern that says that this source, this article or these words spoken by this newsanchor are not very credible. The person saying them might even believe the words they are saying to represent the truth.

 

The words spoken may contain words relevant to the subject at hand. But the words will only appear inflammatory if you let them. Just like if you let the title decide for you what the rest of the article actually provides of context. It's still you who decides what to interpret as fact, or truth.

 

You can, as a liberal or conservative, read the exact same words, from the exact same article, yet the context will more often than not be a symmetric contrast, a mirror image to what your political counter-part will interpret from the exact same literature. It has nothing to do with the intelligence or moral compass of either side.

 

People who consider themselves part of groups makes this mistake. Individuals do not.

If your decisions are based on the collective opinion of a group you identify with, you are not making the decisions.

An ideology that group is following is making the decisions for you.

 

There are indeed conservatives that support Trump, solely based on their group's will whom are completely controlled by ideology.

 

The only thing special about this case is that the truth, the facts, found outside of political ideology on both sides, after investigations that perhaps originated from ideology, yet were systematically performed through intense scrutiny using the objective and scientific approach this caliber of investigators are trained for, happened to favor Trump.

 

When the media represented by left ideology has spent two years strengthening the image in all of their followers' minds that Trump only won because he was a criminal who colluded with Russia, it is going to be really hard for those people to erase that image because they've based a large part of their identity on it, along their definition of reality.

 

This is a perfect opportunity for someone who finds themselves in that position of collective cognitive dissonance, to consider these events as an individual, without the help of others to make that decision for them.

 

Right now, the left is engaging in conspiracy theories. Grabbing at the last straws they can. Mueller's vague conclusion of the report... Was he bought?

 

They should be delighted to hear that it has been decided, a few hours ago to release the entire report, only withholding sensitive information about intelligence gathering, privacy of individuals etc.

 

But will it be enough for an ideology which has based its entire platform for two years on a set outcome?

How far are they willing to go to support the idea, which they have convinced many of, that there is an actual real life villain in the White House?

 

Yes, CIA has been involved in media. I don't need a link to "collective-evolution.com" and its other nonsense to prove that. There is not a single country that hasn't had government agencies actively take part in distributing information, disinformation or propaganda. Some countries do it openly. Others attempt to conceal their influence. They can argue its necessity if revealed, as they have and continue to do. And you can only speculate. And nobody ever speculates that a government is acting in an effort of protecting its own citizens when they censor information.

 

This is a process that has never stopped with the outcome of any of the world wars or conflicts. Anywhere. Ever.

Finding the objective truths despite that fact, is your responsibility in a time like this.

Anything else would be counter-productive to your own intellect. You would truly be an anti-intellectual to deny reality's objective truths after being confronted with their evidence.

 

The growth of information is accelerating exponentially. There are mindblowing articles and news, conspiracies being revealed you will never get the time to read about during your lifetime.

If the context of all the information you need to define reality, is fluently changing based on the political biases of their authors or creators, you will never feel content. You will never know anything.

 

Be particular. Be an individual. Communicate with and learn from other individuals, not representatives of groups.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

can you elaborate?

+1
+3
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

an actual lol comment! nice one.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture

<Double post>

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
theblackswordsman's picture

People believe what they want to believe.

 

Now this guy here should be careful about making claims that this media sensation made the iraq war debaucle look small. That could be easily rationalized for the next wave when a war happens again.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down