Connect with us

Conspiracy Theory

No system can fight fake news for us. We’re on our own.

Published

on

No system can fight fake news for us Were on our own

On January 27, 1838, a 28-year-old Abraham Lincoln made his famous Lyceum Address before the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois, in which he stated, “If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

It’s incredible how relevant the entire speech is to the present-day United States. I don’t want to gush too much about Lincoln’s wisdom, but it’s not an exaggeration to say I could write a hundred articles about the problems affecting our nation today and be able to quote the speech in every one of them. In it, he warns that the only real threat to the United States are the people within who disregard the values that define our nation and undermine the institutions put in place to defend those values. He warns that our decisions must be guided by reason, not emotion, or else we’ll allow demagogues and tyrants to take control of our government and destroy us, if not in a literal sense, then certainly an ideological one.

Emotions like anger and fear can cause us to make passionate decisions without considering the consequences they’ll have in the long run. When exploited properly, these emotions can even be used to make us willingly act against our own best interests. History is littered with stories of leaders who were able to gain immense power by convincing people there was a threat to their well-being that only a strong leader with unchecked power would be able to protect them from. It’s how men like Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini were able to transform democratic nations into fascist dictatorships; they were masters at using people’s emotions to control them.

While I highly doubt a leader like Hitler or Mussolini would ever rise to power in the United States, the methods they used to take power can still be used by our government to expand its authority. In fact, the government has been doing that very thing for decades, particularly when it comes to exploiting people’s emotions, and there’s no better example of this than the Patriot Act.

Americans were angry and terrified in the aftermath of 9/11. They wanted to make sure the people responsible for the attacks were brought to justice and, more importantly, that no attacks of that magnitude happened again. The government promised to do both of these things for us, the only requirement being that we allow it to expand its power at the expense of our own liberty and privacy. It seemed like a small price to pay at the time and many Americans were happy to make the trade, but it’s been nearly two decades and we’re still paying for it. Once the government got that nice, stable foothold in the form of the Patriot Act, it gradually but continuously expanded its power even further than was initially required.

The power was taken bit by bit, slowly enough that most people aren’t even aware just how much things have changed since 9/11. Hell, many adults aren’t even old enough to remember what America was like before 9/11. Each individual loss of freedom seems too small to be worth fighting against, but it all adds up. How many other concessions have we made to the government in exchange for assurances of safety, or even convenience? Americans continue to allow emotions like anger and fear to influence their decisions and we’ve become less free as a result.

Even when people don’t like a change, so long as the change is too small to warrant much of a fuss, everyone will eventually become accustomed to it and forget that it even happened. Once the change becomes the norm, another small change can be made, which will eventually also become the norm, and the cycle repeats. This is known as creeping normality, and it’s terrifying how effective it is. Entire societies can be make to accept things that, previously, they would have found unthinkable. They can have their mindsets completely altered so long as the alterations are made gradually over a long period of time.

That’s why it’s so important for us to let reason, not emotion, influence our decisions. The government will take a mile for every inch we give them and it’s incredibly difficult to get that mile back, so we need to be careful not to give it another foothold it can use to expand its power even further. We made a mistake with the Patriot Act, but mistakes can be some of the most effective lessons. Hopefully we learned from this one because I don’t think it’ll be long before we need to avoid making a similar mistake.

The growing epidemic of fake news has been stirring up a lot of emotion in the United States. As I described in a previous article, Russia is conducting a social engineering operation in the United States in an effort to destroy us from within, and it’s working. Not only are Americans angry that Russia is so brazenly manipulating us, they’re afraid of how effective that manipulation has proven to be. They’re becoming more and more desperate for solutions, and the most popular solution I’ve seen proposed is one that’s about as slippery as a slope can get.

The solution I’m referring to is to create a system that identifies and labels, or even removes, fake news on the Internet. This idea genuinely terrifies me, because who is going to create the system(s) we use to combat fake news? Will it be tech giants like Facebook and Google? I certainly hope not considering how the two of them effectively have a duopoly on web-based information already and have demonstrated numerous times that they’re willing to use that power to push their own agendas. Will it be a consortium of news outlets? Most major news outlets are owned by billionaires or huge media conglomerates that are even more willing to push their agendas than Facebook and Google. Will it be a government agency? That’s quite literally the worst-case scenario and if I need to explain why then you’re on the wrong website.

Plenty of individuals and organizations on every point of the political spectrum are already using the term “fake news” as a weapon to dismiss whatever news or opinions they don’t like. Imagine what kind of weight the term would have if it were an official label branded by an organization that had social influence or, God forbid, legal authority. How powerful do you think an organization that literally gets to define “truth” would be? That’s what I mean when I say this is a slippery slope. We need to avoid creating such a system at all costs. No matter how bad fake news is, a solution like that would be a million times worse.

So if autocratic and oligarchic systems of combating fake news are too risky, what does that leave? A democratic system? Perhaps we could create a platform that compiles links to as many articles and videos as possible and then relies on users to vote on their truthfulness. Maybe instead of voting on articles, users vote on the writers or news outlets themselves. The idea is certainly worth exploring, but I think a democratic system would be far too vulnerable to manipulation to be reliable. No, I don’t think any system, not even a democratic one, will provide us with a solution to the fake news epidemic without causing more problems than it solves. So, when organizations and systems are unable to help us, what do we do?

Well, we just need to learn to help ourselves. Americans need to learn how to find the truth themselves instead of having someone else’s version of the truth spoon-fed to them. They need to put in the research and thought required to actually become informed about important topics instead of regurgitating someone else’s biased, oversimplified take on those topics. They need to start conversing with people they don’t agree with instead of condemning them. They need to let their decisions be influenced by reason instead of emotion. Our democracy can only function properly when the people participating in it are informed and rational, guided by facts and logic. It’s our own responsibility to ensure we meet those requirements and we can’t rely on other people to do it for us. Relying on some system, especially a government one, to do the job for us just undermines the very democracy we’re trying to contribute to.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Conspiracy Theory

Why the Project Veritas censorship story is bigger than you probably realize

Published

on

Why the Project Veritas censorship story is bigger than you probably realize

Another day, another conservative news outlet censored, silenced, or purged. That seems to be the attitude coming from many in the media because, well, it’s just so darn commonplace now the public in general is no longer surprised. It’s expected. It’s becoming normalized.

But Project Veritas crossed a line by going after the blatantly corrupt actions of Pinterest in censoring Live Action as “porn.” The line they crossed was to expose a reality that’s not only true at Pinterest, but likely others in the progressive big tech news filtering business. Project Veritas walked in and presented Google, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, and other big tech companies with a mirror, forcing them to look at themselves and the biased methodology they employ when deciding what news is acceptable and what news is too dangerous for the poor, stupid masses to consume.

If you don’t think these companies believe you’re too stupid to think for yourself, just search for certain topics on any of these platforms. You and I are too stupid to think for yourself on topics like global warming, vaccines, or the 9/11 attacks, so you’re presented with the big-tech-approved “facts” so you won’t be misled. Again, they do this because they believe you and I are stupid.

This most recent installment of information suppression against Project Veritas is pitiful because it represents the quashing of ideas that run contrary to their narrative. They are pro-abortion, 100%, which is why Live Action had to be labeled as “porn.” They couldn’t find anything else in their terms of service to slap on Live Action’s content, so someone made the determination that they could get away with labeling it as porn. That, in itself, is a testament to the depravity rampant in these organizations. It takes a very sick mind to believe depictions of abortion can somehow arouse people. Perhaps some at Pinterest have different perspectives on what arouses them.

It’s imperative that every patriotic American is made aware of what was done to Project Veritas, Live Action, and anyone who wants the truth to be known. This is quickly becoming a post-truth society in which someone’s feelings supersede objective realities. This is beyond post-modernism. This is about autonomy, a world in which whatever a person feels is their personal objective truth regardless of what science, religion, culture, or common sense tells them.

In a post-truth society, reality can no longer be a defense against the follies of the collective.

Investigative reporting is only as powerful as the platform that broadcasts it. What the tech giants have done is limit the platforms they control to suppress the truth. Every American should stand opposed to this outrage.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Jessica Biel goes anti-vaxxer and Twitter goes nuts

Published

on

Jessica Biel goes anti-vaxxer

If you want to get scorn from both sides of the political aisle, come out against vaccines. Progressives, conservatives, and everyone in between seems to have a majority of people in favor of laws that would force parents to get their children vaccinated.

California is currently debating legislation that would eliminate many of the exemptions currently used by parents to prevent their children from being vaccinated. Actress Jessica Biel met with lawmaker to discuss it, and suddenly Twitter is loaded with hate for the Total Recall reboot star.

When it comes to healthcare issues, the debate normally rests around costs. Healthcare rights of parents are ignored, pushed into the trash bin of “settled science” that makes many go completely unhinged when skeptics voice their concerns. Google has gone so far as to “educate” the population; you won’t find videos attacking vaccines without a clear warning by YouTube attempting to debunk their concerns.

For some reason, it’s been turned into a conspiracy theory when in reality it comes down to the rights of parents. But don’t call it that in the wrong crowd. You’ll be labeled an anti-vaxxer like Jessica Biel.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Symbolism: The tree planted at the White House by Trump and Macron has died

Published

on

Symbolism The tree planted at the White House by Trump and Macron has died

In April, 2018, the Presidents of the United States and France dug a hole together on the White House lawn to plant an oak tree. It was from the Belleau Wood north-east of Paris where 1,811 Americans died in June 1918 while fighting in WWI.  The tree was supposed to symbolize the strong relationship between America and France and act as a reminder of the importance of our alliance.

But relationships between the two Presidents have been deteriorating as Emmanuel Macron’s staunch adherence to globalism has clashed with President Trump’s belief in nationalism.

Just as the relationship has soured, so too has the tree. It has been confirmed as dying in quarantine.

After the planting in front of their wives and the press, the tree was uprooted and placed in quarantine as required by law. It never made it out of quarantine, just as the relationship between the far-left Macron and the populist conservative Trump has never been positive. They first clashed over the Paris Climate Accords, which President Trump backed out of shortly after moving into the White House. From there, the two leaders have headed in opposite directions. Macron, who was considered to be a centrist during his campaign before demonstrating this radical progressive traits once in power, has seen his nation falling apart at the seems with daily protests flooding the streets of Paris and other cities. Meanwhile, the President is enjoying strong polling numbers and an incredible economy in the United States.

Was the tree’s death a harbinger of the floundering relationship between France and America? Perhaps. As long as Macron retains his globalist credentials, it’s hard to imagine him relating to President Trump at all.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending