Speaking to the majority

rgosCaryslike this

I recently had a negative experience talking to a relative-by-marriage. I was called paranoid for my beliefs. Here’s a good comment on dealing with the non-fakeologists.

“It’s a fact, that it’s usually a miserable experience when talking to a member of 95% club and it sucks that I need a differnt set of friends to talk about manufactured reality. So I feel comforted by reading that someone else alike has similar issues and can then relate to this and such reality with more optimism. Something that is rarely seen in these days as much as the balls needed to say it out loud.” But that is the whole problem? Why is it so “miserable” to talk to the 95%? Do you have any illusion

Source: The Columbine effect | Piece of Mindful

Another good comment:

We do agree on many issues, but not all. I should have better explained my opinion in the first place.

The miserable part would be talking about fake events or faked reality with 95ers. I do socialize with such people and do manage to find pleasure in it and I sincerely like many of them, so don’t get me wrong there. It’s just that I lately don’t spend my precious time on chit-chat, I find it boring and it frustrates me. Why, you may ask? When I began realizing what the hell is going on around me, it was overwhelming. And it still is, I could be talking about it almost all the time, but there is only one friend I can relate to about the fakery. Realizing that makes my contact with 95ers miserable, I just can’t stomach small talk for more than 15m while so much more relevant stuff is going on. And I have little patience left for their lack of desire – to use their own heads properly. That is, to follow the logic and reason, which some refer to as “critical thinking” (I find that as exaggeration, just what is critical in thinking about the right questions? ). I know, I tried approaching many of them with discouraging results. So I don’t do it anymore unless they would bring it up themselves, which is something I’m yet awaiting to happen. Knowing them, it won’t change any time soon unless I switch my company and/or friends first, which is even less likely to happen. At the end of the day, I do care for my friends, the 95ers, and it makes me sad and miserable when I see that they can’t be a part of my hopes for a change. If and when such change for better happens, they will be lead and not leading it. There is actually nothing optimistic in that fact, but I still hope for the better to follow. For the sake of our children, I’d agree.

You then took my partial statement and asked if “that” is the whole problem. The issue is, I suppose, the miserable feeling that I described above. I don’t have any problem with it, actually, nor with anything else I wrote about. I just chimed in to confirm that the emperor is really naked. We’re discussing the apparent division, 95% vs 5%, and all related stuff, which seem to have upset you in the way Mark has put it. I don’t see it in the way you do, but I don’t have an issue with it. We perceive the essence of his post differently, which seems as the only problem of the moment ? My optimism has absolutely nothing to do it, but since you’ve brought it to this debate, I read his post as positive and I understand your stance about it as less positive than my own. But let’s not make a drama out of it, please, as anyone’s optimism is actually irrelevant to the essence.

False flag vs hoax debate is fueled with cognitive dissonance, in my opinion. It’s really hard to understand and to accept, that the PTB go that far to fake it all, full 100%. The bigger the lie gets, it becomes less and less likely the people will doubt it. I’m lately convinced it’s always about the hoax (with major wars as exceptions), why would they bother with pleasing us, the 5%? So why kill real people, when few badly done Iphone videos of vicsims can do perfectly well for 95% ? Who cares about it, actually, if we managed to deconstruct any such event as hoax, we’re already tagged as “cranks” by most of our own friends. And whom could we tell the real story, if we got it right, anyway? Not to our friends nor TV, that’s for sure, so they already have us contained. The elephant is already in the room, it just depends whether you are ready to see it.

We are pushing the truth, while the PTB are pushing exclusively lies. The method may seem the same, but it isn’t. Lies have to be continuously spread, if they’re not, the world as we know would collapse. The need to push the truth is only instant. Yes, we have been formatted and programmed for decades, so I believe that stopping the propaganda machinery is crucial. But that also means that the set of authorities and rulers is replaced. Replaced with what exactly? Can you imagine the world, where no lies are told? Hardly, but when it eventually happens, there will be no need to push anything as the people will evolve from mental slaves into something much more lovable.

3 thoughts on “Speaking to the majority

  1. gaia


    In my opinion pushing other people (= pushing other people away) is counterproductive.

    Yes, sow the seeds, yes, share links, information, details, inconsistencies, remarks and opinions.

    But leave it at that.

    If they start looking into these staged events, fake “reality”, tales told to us, the sheeple. then fine. If they don’t, no lives lost. In the end only individuals can learn and strip away untruths, nobody can do that for them.

    What is a key point here is, in my humble yet experienced opinion, is that this is all HOBBY. Other people go on a hunt, solve mathematical problems (i.e. magic) or play sports together, we do this. It doesn’t make us better (the label shills want to give us) or worse (idem), it just means we have a sharp mind, no barrier to scrutinize and we think straight, applying logic, reason and especially consistency.

    If others want to hate us for that, go ahead, you’re not providing any insights anyway.

    The only thing that remains is; the world is a crazy stage play, a set of actors wanting to perpetrate a certain narrative to keep others in line.

    I am comfortable not standing in that line.

    Are you?

  2. CarysCarys

    Your beliefs don’t affirm your relative’s life choices. There’s a sunk cost there! 😉

    You may have seen it already, but the persona Vinny Eastwood published a humorous piece on this a while back.

    See his reference to “The 7th Man”.

    www.thevinnyeastwoodshow.com…

    The 7th Man
    Statistically it takes about 7 different people to tell you something contrary to your belief system before you’ll consider abandoning it (not the same person repeating it to you 7 times), this is a bell curve of course, so some might only need to be told by one person and others may need to be told by a hundred thousand different people over the course of a lifetime. 

    If you’re the first person to walk up to someone and say: “Hey! Did you know the world is run by ruthless criminal sociopathic scumbaggery?” The likelihood is they’ll call you a conspiracy theorist or some other insult then ridicule and ignore you. 

    However, if you’re the 7th person to walk up to them and say: “Hey! Did you know the world is run by ruthless criminal sociopathic scumbaggery?” there’s a much greater likelihood that this person will say something like: “You know, a lot of people been saying that lately…” and start asking you questions about it instead of denying it outright or being abusive.

Leave a Reply