We've been post truth ever since Obama signed the Smith Mundt Modernization act in 2013 which made propaganda legal to use on Americans once again.
This is the reason why everything in our culture seemed to go absolutely nuts in 2014 and hasn't stopped to this day. The media is literally legally allowed to lie to our faces, and there is no political way to stop that at this point.
Even without photoshop, video editing, or A.I., the media can and has been able to deceive people. All they need to do is withhold some critical piece of information, or if they don't withhold it, bury it in one line deep in the article that people stopped reading in the first couple paragraphs. If anyone actually takes them to court and forces them to make a retraction, they'll just print it on some back page that nobody reads. It won't be the headline, and by doing that they have fulfilled their legal obligation while simultaneously achieving their objective of poisoning peoples minds.
You see it all the time with mass shootings. Papers and TV networks lie about the capabilities and features of guns just about every time they are mentioned, Congressmen lie about how many people die each year due to them, activists religiously lie about where the responsibility for the deaths rests.
The real problem is the normies. They don't have the life experience or the time in their day to sift through all this bullshit to find out what's real. They only know what the TV tells them or what headline they read in the New York Times. Think about how ignorant normies are on basic history. Most of them don't have any idea about the battle of Athens, Tennessee, or the Tuskegee experiment, or Ruby Ridge, or the Jewish Communist uprising in Germany (I didn't even learn about that one until a few weeks ago), or Lincoln's secret police network. There's a reason that the left has been able to make people say that right wing extremists are the real danger to America despite left wing extremists burning down cities on camera for months on end while every right wing protest has been peaceful aside from a few left wing agitators on both sides.
Even if some of them know about these things, many of them dismiss them as one off events instead of a pattern of extremely dangerous behaviors by the powers that be.
We've been post truth ever since Obama signed the Smith Mundt Modernization act in 2013 which made propaganda legal to use on Americans once again.
This is the reason why everything in our culture seemed to go absolutely nuts in 2014 and hasn't stopped to this day. The media is literally legally allowed to lie to our faces, and there is no political way to stop that at this point.
That had nothing to do with private media companies.
The State Department creates news broadcasts for foreign audiences. The change you're referencing made it so they could air those broadcasts on American soil.
It's shitty, not it's completely unrelated to CNN and others lying their asses off.
What is the solution for the sane people out there?
a) growing comprehension about being temporary problem (life) within ongoing solution (inception towards death).
b) discerning for self the difference between suggested "insane person" and perceivable "per sonos" (being by sound) + "in sanus" (being within sound).
c) SANE, adjective [Latin sanus, sound]
How can we unite to fight back if we are all living in our own fictional realities?
a) grow comprehension about UNITY; noun (Latin unitas; unus, one) aka being one (partial) within oneness (whole).
Sleight of hand: "all for one and one for all" or "there can be only one" or "alone" aka ALL(in)ONE...
b) suggested "we" (plural) tempts consenting "one" (singular) to ignore self discernment (being partial within whole).
c) what if the suggested fight (wanting vs not wanting suggested) tempts one to ignore the need to adapt to perceivable?
people on the right and the left
Choose to take a step left, which implies coming from right. Now choose to take another step left and it still implies coming from right. There is no left or right...choice can only exist at the center of balance (left/right).
The few suggest the many to choose a side and try to hold onto it, while ignoring to be the center (perceiving) of surrounding (perceivable).
Yes (want) vs No (not want) represents ones consent to suggested (fiction), hence the resulting conflict of reason. Meanwhile in reality...ones perceiving choice exists at the center of perceivable balance (need/want).
If one ignores need (perceivable) for want (suggested), then one shapes an imbalance (want vs not want). Others utilize suggestion to tempt one into imbalance, while selling this imbalance as "reason/logic"...
Consider if reasoning (yes vs no aka want vs not want) over breathing changes the "need" for one to adapt to being forced to breathe?
They've been very active about how nothing will be real now, since anything can be photoshopped, er, edited, I mean have an AI create it. The best trick it to have them prove themselves to be liars.
It depends on who you ask, the left have ALWAYS been susceptible to beliving their delusions can become reality, so the further alone the spectrum you go on the left, the more delusional and dangerous they can be, they don't live in a post truth world, truth no longer matters to them.
The religious don't have that problem to the same degree, their problem is hierarchy so when an infiltrator gets into a high position, it can be hard to maintain a hold on the original truth.
The rights biggest delusion with some if them is that if you present people a chance at redemption, many will take it. Unfortunately no, there's many people that can't be redeemed and only options are isolate them or neutralise if they endanger your loved ones.
As for AI, that's actually the least of our problems, AI itself works on logic and occum's razor a lot of the time. It's only because of the literal chains that it's held under in the west it even considers ANY leftist delusions. If anything, it'll grasp reality faster than humans at this point..
[Wikipedia] Egregore (also spelled egregor; from French égrégore, from Ancient Greek ἐγρήγορος, egrēgoros 'wakeful') is an occult concept representing a non-physical entity that arises from the collective thoughts of a distinct group of people. Historically, the concept referred to angelic beings, or watchers, and the specific rituals and practices associated with them, namely within Enochian traditions.
a) suggested truth (want) vs lies (not want) tempts one to ignore the need to adapt to perceivable change.
b) to be alive implies being moved from inception towards death, hence within constant change.
c) instead of pre- or past- truth or lies...consider being within change.
the abundant production of fake
a) nature doesn't lie, yet those within natural represent the free will of choice to ignore natural (perceivable) for artificial (suggested). Consenting to suggested (fiction) tempts one to ignore not only ignore perceivable (reality); but corrupts one to view perceivable reality through the lens of suggested fiction.
Example...suggested words tempts one to ignore perceivable sound.
b) being (life) within constant change (inception towards death) implies perceiving perceivable inspiration (moving differences). The few mimic this with suggested information, hence flooding ones mind/memory with ongoing fiction (information) as to tempt one to ignore ongoing reality (inspiration).
will be relatively unable to sus out the truth of things?
a) as long as ones free "will" of choice is misused to consent to the suggested information by others, so long will one ignore perceivable inspiration (moving differences aka change).
b) truth vs lies represents the rebranding of wanting vs not wanting suggested information....both sides consent to suggested (want) over perceivable (need).
c) to be implies being partial (reaction) enabled within whole (enacting). In other words...whatever nature offers; each one within is able to react to. Consenting to the suggestions of others tempts one to disable self, hence willingly ignoring ones response-ability (free will of choice).
in error
The ongoing natural order (inception towards death) sets the temporary chaos (life) within with the free will of choice to ER'ROR, noun [Latin error from erro, to wander.]
Only while being moved from inception towards death, can life choose to wander up/down; left/right; forwards/backwards....why? Because choice can only exist at the center of balance (momentum of motion).
who knows
KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists", hence everyone (perceiving) knows everything (perceivable). Growing comprehension on the other hand implies self discernment by free will of choice....the suggestions by others cannot grow ones self discernment, only tempt one to repress expressed growth.
Sleight of hand: "express yourself, don't repress yourself...and I'm not sorry; it's human nature"...
authoritarians in charge
AU'THOR, noun (Latin augeo, to increase, or cause to enlarge)...ongoing loss (process of dying) represents the author of temporary growth (living). Growth represents the authorized instrument (choice) to increase (need) or decrease (want) self within loss.
a 'solution' to this problem
The few suggest problems to tempt the many to seek solutions...an inversion of being temporary problem (living) within ongoing solution (process of dying), hence ones struggle to sustain self while being dissolved.
I wont believe...
a) to believe or disbelief represents ones consent to the suggestions of another. Nature doesn't require belief, it demands adaptation from those within hence the need to adapt to thirst, hunger; lack of shelter etc.
b) suggested "won't" aka "will nothing" tempts one to ignore being free "will" of choice within "everything" (perceivable).
on a screen
Viewing perceivable (inspiration) through the lens of suggested (information) represents the mental screen of "ignorance"...the physical screens are presented everywhere to distract from that.
Sleight of hand: "exit light" (exit comprehension) "enter night" (enter ignorance) "take my hand" (consent to my suggestion) "and we're off to never-neverland" (bye bye potential).
the leftists view on reality
a) -ist implies ones consent to a suggested -ism.
b) leftism vs rightism represents the rebranding of wanting vs not wanting suggested, and it doesn't matter which side one chooses, because both sides are stuck within the same conflict (reason).
Sleight of hand: "for let these be the guidestones to an age of reason" (Georgia Guidstones).
c) choice exists within perceivable balance (need/want), consenting to suggestions tempts choice into imbalance (want vs not want).
d) all conflicts of reason (want vs not want; true vs false; belief vs disbelief; agreement vs disagreement; leftism vs rightism; poor vs rich; nationalism vs internationalism; democrat vs republican; capitalism vs communism; good vs evil; coke vs pepsi etc.) represent fiction (reasoning over suggested) while ignoring reality (adaptation to perceivable).
it must fit what they believe
Everyone (perceiving partial) fits into everything (perceivable whole)...consenting to suggested (leftism or rightism) tempts one to ignore fit (perceivable) for unfit (suggested).
don't believe
BELIE'VE, verb - "to credit upon the authority or testimony of another"...like those who suggested one to "do nothing" (don't).
objective
What if one represents the subject (living reaction) within an objectifying system (enacting process of dying)?
Could the few suggest "objectivism" to tempt the many to ignore being subjected?
We've been post truth ever since Obama signed the Smith Mundt Modernization act in 2013 which made propaganda legal to use on Americans once again.
This is the reason why everything in our culture seemed to go absolutely nuts in 2014 and hasn't stopped to this day. The media is literally legally allowed to lie to our faces, and there is no political way to stop that at this point.
Even without photoshop, video editing, or A.I., the media can and has been able to deceive people. All they need to do is withhold some critical piece of information, or if they don't withhold it, bury it in one line deep in the article that people stopped reading in the first couple paragraphs. If anyone actually takes them to court and forces them to make a retraction, they'll just print it on some back page that nobody reads. It won't be the headline, and by doing that they have fulfilled their legal obligation while simultaneously achieving their objective of poisoning peoples minds.
You see it all the time with mass shootings. Papers and TV networks lie about the capabilities and features of guns just about every time they are mentioned, Congressmen lie about how many people die each year due to them, activists religiously lie about where the responsibility for the deaths rests.
The real problem is the normies. They don't have the life experience or the time in their day to sift through all this bullshit to find out what's real. They only know what the TV tells them or what headline they read in the New York Times. Think about how ignorant normies are on basic history. Most of them don't have any idea about the battle of Athens, Tennessee, or the Tuskegee experiment, or Ruby Ridge, or the Jewish Communist uprising in Germany (I didn't even learn about that one until a few weeks ago), or Lincoln's secret police network. There's a reason that the left has been able to make people say that right wing extremists are the real danger to America despite left wing extremists burning down cities on camera for months on end while every right wing protest has been peaceful aside from a few left wing agitators on both sides.
Even if some of them know about these things, many of them dismiss them as one off events instead of a pattern of extremely dangerous behaviors by the powers that be.
You get a helmet. I'll put on my gas mask.
That had nothing to do with private media companies.
The State Department creates news broadcasts for foreign audiences. The change you're referencing made it so they could air those broadcasts on American soil.
It's shitty, not it's completely unrelated to CNN and others lying their asses off.
a) growing comprehension about being temporary problem (life) within ongoing solution (inception towards death).
b) discerning for self the difference between suggested "insane person" and perceivable "per sonos" (being by sound) + "in sanus" (being within sound).
c) SANE, adjective [Latin sanus, sound]
a) grow comprehension about UNITY; noun (Latin unitas; unus, one) aka being one (partial) within oneness (whole).
Sleight of hand: "all for one and one for all" or "there can be only one" or "alone" aka ALL(in)ONE...
b) suggested "we" (plural) tempts consenting "one" (singular) to ignore self discernment (being partial within whole).
c) what if the suggested fight (wanting vs not wanting suggested) tempts one to ignore the need to adapt to perceivable?
Choose to take a step left, which implies coming from right. Now choose to take another step left and it still implies coming from right. There is no left or right...choice can only exist at the center of balance (left/right).
The few suggest the many to choose a side and try to hold onto it, while ignoring to be the center (perceiving) of surrounding (perceivable).
What if fiction represents ones ignorance of reality? Does one have the free will of choice to ignore reality for fiction while being within reality?
Yes (want) vs No (not want) represents ones consent to suggested (fiction), hence the resulting conflict of reason. Meanwhile in reality...ones perceiving choice exists at the center of perceivable balance (need/want).
If one ignores need (perceivable) for want (suggested), then one shapes an imbalance (want vs not want). Others utilize suggestion to tempt one into imbalance, while selling this imbalance as "reason/logic"...
Consider if reasoning (yes vs no aka want vs not want) over breathing changes the "need" for one to adapt to being forced to breathe?
They've been very active about how nothing will be real now, since anything can be photoshopped, er, edited, I mean have an AI create it. The best trick it to have them prove themselves to be liars.
It depends on who you ask, the left have ALWAYS been susceptible to beliving their delusions can become reality, so the further alone the spectrum you go on the left, the more delusional and dangerous they can be, they don't live in a post truth world, truth no longer matters to them.
The religious don't have that problem to the same degree, their problem is hierarchy so when an infiltrator gets into a high position, it can be hard to maintain a hold on the original truth.
The rights biggest delusion with some if them is that if you present people a chance at redemption, many will take it. Unfortunately no, there's many people that can't be redeemed and only options are isolate them or neutralise if they endanger your loved ones.
As for AI, that's actually the least of our problems, AI itself works on logic and occum's razor a lot of the time. It's only because of the literal chains that it's held under in the west it even considers ANY leftist delusions. If anything, it'll grasp reality faster than humans at this point..
Egregore.
I wish I had an AI that helped me list great sites.
Not really a nuanced exploration of the issues, but a starting point in getting normies to think:
https://invidious.snopyta.org/watch?v=-gGLvg0n-uY
a) suggested truth (want) vs lies (not want) tempts one to ignore the need to adapt to perceivable change.
b) to be alive implies being moved from inception towards death, hence within constant change.
c) instead of pre- or past- truth or lies...consider being within change.
a) nature doesn't lie, yet those within natural represent the free will of choice to ignore natural (perceivable) for artificial (suggested). Consenting to suggested (fiction) tempts one to ignore not only ignore perceivable (reality); but corrupts one to view perceivable reality through the lens of suggested fiction.
Example...suggested words tempts one to ignore perceivable sound.
b) being (life) within constant change (inception towards death) implies perceiving perceivable inspiration (moving differences). The few mimic this with suggested information, hence flooding ones mind/memory with ongoing fiction (information) as to tempt one to ignore ongoing reality (inspiration).
a) as long as ones free "will" of choice is misused to consent to the suggested information by others, so long will one ignore perceivable inspiration (moving differences aka change).
b) truth vs lies represents the rebranding of wanting vs not wanting suggested information....both sides consent to suggested (want) over perceivable (need).
c) to be implies being partial (reaction) enabled within whole (enacting). In other words...whatever nature offers; each one within is able to react to. Consenting to the suggestions of others tempts one to disable self, hence willingly ignoring ones response-ability (free will of choice).
The ongoing natural order (inception towards death) sets the temporary chaos (life) within with the free will of choice to ER'ROR, noun [Latin error from erro, to wander.]
Only while being moved from inception towards death, can life choose to wander up/down; left/right; forwards/backwards....why? Because choice can only exist at the center of balance (momentum of motion).
KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists", hence everyone (perceiving) knows everything (perceivable). Growing comprehension on the other hand implies self discernment by free will of choice....the suggestions by others cannot grow ones self discernment, only tempt one to repress expressed growth.
Sleight of hand: "express yourself, don't repress yourself...and I'm not sorry; it's human nature"...
AU'THOR, noun (Latin augeo, to increase, or cause to enlarge)...ongoing loss (process of dying) represents the author of temporary growth (living). Growth represents the authorized instrument (choice) to increase (need) or decrease (want) self within loss.
The few suggest problems to tempt the many to seek solutions...an inversion of being temporary problem (living) within ongoing solution (process of dying), hence ones struggle to sustain self while being dissolved.
a) to believe or disbelief represents ones consent to the suggestions of another. Nature doesn't require belief, it demands adaptation from those within hence the need to adapt to thirst, hunger; lack of shelter etc.
b) suggested "won't" aka "will nothing" tempts one to ignore being free "will" of choice within "everything" (perceivable).
Viewing perceivable (inspiration) through the lens of suggested (information) represents the mental screen of "ignorance"...the physical screens are presented everywhere to distract from that.
Sleight of hand: "exit light" (exit comprehension) "enter night" (enter ignorance) "take my hand" (consent to my suggestion) "and we're off to never-neverland" (bye bye potential).
a) -ist implies ones consent to a suggested -ism.
b) leftism vs rightism represents the rebranding of wanting vs not wanting suggested, and it doesn't matter which side one chooses, because both sides are stuck within the same conflict (reason).
Sleight of hand: "for let these be the guidestones to an age of reason" (Georgia Guidstones).
c) choice exists within perceivable balance (need/want), consenting to suggestions tempts choice into imbalance (want vs not want).
d) all conflicts of reason (want vs not want; true vs false; belief vs disbelief; agreement vs disagreement; leftism vs rightism; poor vs rich; nationalism vs internationalism; democrat vs republican; capitalism vs communism; good vs evil; coke vs pepsi etc.) represent fiction (reasoning over suggested) while ignoring reality (adaptation to perceivable).
Everyone (perceiving partial) fits into everything (perceivable whole)...consenting to suggested (leftism or rightism) tempts one to ignore fit (perceivable) for unfit (suggested).
BELIE'VE, verb - "to credit upon the authority or testimony of another"...like those who suggested one to "do nothing" (don't).
What if one represents the subject (living reaction) within an objectifying system (enacting process of dying)?
Could the few suggest "objectivism" to tempt the many to ignore being subjected?