"For every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil is one striking at the root." -Ralph Waldo Emerson Articles from the Wars of the Matrix GANGs can be found here. My (second) article on the Dalai Lama drew some heated conversation. It also drew multiple emails which might be amalgamated as, "We should all be revisiting our assumptions of history." Regardless of who does or doesn't agree with my primary perspective on a topic, I love the energy to look back, sweep some dust away, and dig at the roots. We will not find our way out of the Matrix without detaching ourselves from perspectives that we have made too much a part of our identities. Our
Persuasion is more art than science: attempts primarily based on facts and figures are doomed to fail compared to clever appeals to emotion. Our Matrix Overlords are exceedingly gifted at amplifying fear, manipulating compassion, and ruthlessly shaming their opposition.
I think that much of the Matrix is a matter of lobotomizing people so that their logos takes a backseat to their pathos. I know plenty of people who make decisions based on information. Treating people as if they cannot be educated seems like a defeatist approach. It only sets us up for a revolution that replaces the old Matrix operators with the new.
People have far greater capacities than we usually realize. I discovered that multiple ways, including running a school in Central Alabama in which the average SAT score exceeded 1470.
Questioning our assumptions must be part of the process of defeating the Matrix. Clown world is the direct result of raising a population through primarily emotional appeals and manipulation.
I wish that I shared your optimism, but fear that Clown World is here to stay. Even highly intelligent people are easily manipulated by simple techniques of stoking fear and pointing the finger at outgroup scapegoats for appeasement, as the last few years of Pharma Fascism illustrate.
Nothing more clearly exemplified Kurtz assertion then my second jury duty experience in my late 20s. It was a pretty cut and dried failure to follow lawful orders from a police officer. The very young prosecutor put on a well-presented factual case walking through each step of the encounter with witnesses including the wife who was in the car and actually corroborated the policemen‘s account on the stand (essentially a large party had broken out into the streets and started a violent fight with objects including glass bottles being thrown. Police were called out to contain the incident and had blocked the through street entrance/exit to that block. The defendant was coming home at 2 AM (perhaps after enjoyed a few dinner party cocktails) with his wife *and infant child* in the car. He challenged the policemen when they directed him to detour to the next street over to avoid driving right through the dangerous scene. He argued, and the policeman explained multiple times while at the same time trying to conduct their other duties of keeping their team members safe and situationally aware of the escalating mob. Eventually when the police refused to allow him to drive down the street, the defendant got out of the car and made moves toward one of the policeman ignoring their instructions to stand back. They had to restrain him and he was ultimately arrested and charged.). I thought this would be an easy and quick jury double liberation deliberation, but we were there the better part of two days. The defense attorney had put on and emotionally charged and incredibly contrived defense, but 10 of the 12 jury members bought into it hook line and sinker. There was no factual evidence to contravene the prosecutor's presentation. I couldn’t believe what was unfolding before my eyes. It was like a group of people shouting and arguing about a ridiculously contrived soap opera ("it was his right to drive down whatever street he chose – it was his neighborhood!“ ; "Did you see how terrified his wife was on the stand – she was absolutely shaking and it was all the fault of the police!“.). Not that a simple one block detour I would have avoided endangering himself, wife, infant child, and the police officers he was distracting from doing their duty. The women, especially, were shouting and screaming in the jury room supporting the defendant like it was a Jerry Springer show. Emotion and especially drama are what sold the day. It changed my perception of human nature from that day forward. Once you see it, you can’t on see it… And I see it played out every day by the leftists. They are masters of drama and emotional manipulation. No amount of rationalism can cut through that... well, to be fair, perhaps on very rare occasions, but I am absolutely convinced we won’t win the (name your righteous) war trying to fight emotion and drama with rational facts. It pains me greatly because that is the only way I know how to fight. I can’t argue based on nonsensical emotions. And that leaves me defenseless and virtually useless to the cause…
I am trying to say that in my personal experience both in direct interactions and observations of people in my circles (family, friends, neighbors and extended acquaintances (mostly non-technical oriented folks) and work colleagues (technical/aerospace industry)) that I observe people being led primarily by emotion — and not the presentation of facts or rational argument. I don’t know what your experience was, but for example, personally I was not able to dissuade even one person in my circle to simply wait for six or eight months until the fall before taking the injection when it was rolled out in early '21. Not one person. Not even to just wait to see what the initial results might turn out to be before blindly accepting an experimental and unproven medical procedure. I did read, though did not expect anyone else I know to, the trial results. No one even wanted to have the simplest of discussions. And I am talking about college educated/degreed individuals. And please believe me, I’m not trying to throw one or two examples in your face and say "all is lost." I’m only attempting to exemplify why I have come to the conclusion that it is so difficult to overcome peoples' emotional decision making with facts and rationale. So many people see fax is boring, and work… But whip them up Jerry Springer like and now you’ve got a show! I never understood how those shows could draw any viewers on television, but overtime this has been my conclusion, though I don’t like it. Mathew, believe me I am not criticizing you and I applaud all of your efforts. I have also not given up, as that is not in my nature, it’s not even possible for me. But I am profoundly discouraged. I love and admire all of your substacks, videos, tweets… Everything you publish. I am excited about your new endeavors to create a new paradigm in education. But I cannot get over the fact that I am discouraged by what I see around me and the profound lack of interest of people to be educated or to educate themselves. Most seem to be looking for entertainment.
Maybe we need to lead with ethics or an ethical worldview primarily, and then bring along epistemology (or maybe an ethics of epistemology) as an outgrowth.
Maybe incitement of fear, plays on emotion, manipulation of natural impulses (base or noble), dishonest and manipulative language and behavior and the like can be unmasked from an ethical framework first (coupled maybe with some analysis/critique/exposure/explanation and training in spotting the techniques), allowing room for--and even elevation of--humility and rational conversation afterwards.
If a person interacts happily and frictionless with 99 people who believe and understand X, that person is likely to scoff and dismiss someone who understands Y. Despite that, Y people should persist is they know the X's are being played.
Dealing with the suffocation of our enslavement takes up so much of our bandwidth that I find it unlikely we make the choice to explore epistemology unless it’s incentivised by an immediate reward of relief from said enslavement. Education is key. This is why I find Meta Prep so darn exciting.
Persuasion is more art than science: attempts primarily based on facts and figures are doomed to fail compared to clever appeals to emotion. Our Matrix Overlords are exceedingly gifted at amplifying fear, manipulating compassion, and ruthlessly shaming their opposition.
I think that much of the Matrix is a matter of lobotomizing people so that their logos takes a backseat to their pathos. I know plenty of people who make decisions based on information. Treating people as if they cannot be educated seems like a defeatist approach. It only sets us up for a revolution that replaces the old Matrix operators with the new.
People have far greater capacities than we usually realize. I discovered that multiple ways, including running a school in Central Alabama in which the average SAT score exceeded 1470.
Questioning our assumptions must be part of the process of defeating the Matrix. Clown world is the direct result of raising a population through primarily emotional appeals and manipulation.
I wish that I shared your optimism, but fear that Clown World is here to stay. Even highly intelligent people are easily manipulated by simple techniques of stoking fear and pointing the finger at outgroup scapegoats for appeasement, as the last few years of Pharma Fascism illustrate.
There is no reason for a false dichotomy. Leading with some reason does not mean moving without emotion.
Is there some reason why Madhava did not see what he saw---people willing to talk, and reconsider?
Nothing more clearly exemplified Kurtz assertion then my second jury duty experience in my late 20s. It was a pretty cut and dried failure to follow lawful orders from a police officer. The very young prosecutor put on a well-presented factual case walking through each step of the encounter with witnesses including the wife who was in the car and actually corroborated the policemen‘s account on the stand (essentially a large party had broken out into the streets and started a violent fight with objects including glass bottles being thrown. Police were called out to contain the incident and had blocked the through street entrance/exit to that block. The defendant was coming home at 2 AM (perhaps after enjoyed a few dinner party cocktails) with his wife *and infant child* in the car. He challenged the policemen when they directed him to detour to the next street over to avoid driving right through the dangerous scene. He argued, and the policeman explained multiple times while at the same time trying to conduct their other duties of keeping their team members safe and situationally aware of the escalating mob. Eventually when the police refused to allow him to drive down the street, the defendant got out of the car and made moves toward one of the policeman ignoring their instructions to stand back. They had to restrain him and he was ultimately arrested and charged.). I thought this would be an easy and quick jury double liberation deliberation, but we were there the better part of two days. The defense attorney had put on and emotionally charged and incredibly contrived defense, but 10 of the 12 jury members bought into it hook line and sinker. There was no factual evidence to contravene the prosecutor's presentation. I couldn’t believe what was unfolding before my eyes. It was like a group of people shouting and arguing about a ridiculously contrived soap opera ("it was his right to drive down whatever street he chose – it was his neighborhood!“ ; "Did you see how terrified his wife was on the stand – she was absolutely shaking and it was all the fault of the police!“.). Not that a simple one block detour I would have avoided endangering himself, wife, infant child, and the police officers he was distracting from doing their duty. The women, especially, were shouting and screaming in the jury room supporting the defendant like it was a Jerry Springer show. Emotion and especially drama are what sold the day. It changed my perception of human nature from that day forward. Once you see it, you can’t on see it… And I see it played out every day by the leftists. They are masters of drama and emotional manipulation. No amount of rationalism can cut through that... well, to be fair, perhaps on very rare occasions, but I am absolutely convinced we won’t win the (name your righteous) war trying to fight emotion and drama with rational facts. It pains me greatly because that is the only way I know how to fight. I can’t argue based on nonsensical emotions. And that leaves me defenseless and virtually useless to the cause…
Are you saying, "People cannot be educated"?
If so, you'll have to do better than an example from the past.
If you're giving up educating people through reason (or a combination or reason and emotion) without trying, that's on you.
Do you have something like proof that a population cannot be educated?
Hmmmm.
I am trying to say that in my personal experience both in direct interactions and observations of people in my circles (family, friends, neighbors and extended acquaintances (mostly non-technical oriented folks) and work colleagues (technical/aerospace industry)) that I observe people being led primarily by emotion — and not the presentation of facts or rational argument. I don’t know what your experience was, but for example, personally I was not able to dissuade even one person in my circle to simply wait for six or eight months until the fall before taking the injection when it was rolled out in early '21. Not one person. Not even to just wait to see what the initial results might turn out to be before blindly accepting an experimental and unproven medical procedure. I did read, though did not expect anyone else I know to, the trial results. No one even wanted to have the simplest of discussions. And I am talking about college educated/degreed individuals. And please believe me, I’m not trying to throw one or two examples in your face and say "all is lost." I’m only attempting to exemplify why I have come to the conclusion that it is so difficult to overcome peoples' emotional decision making with facts and rationale. So many people see fax is boring, and work… But whip them up Jerry Springer like and now you’ve got a show! I never understood how those shows could draw any viewers on television, but overtime this has been my conclusion, though I don’t like it. Mathew, believe me I am not criticizing you and I applaud all of your efforts. I have also not given up, as that is not in my nature, it’s not even possible for me. But I am profoundly discouraged. I love and admire all of your substacks, videos, tweets… Everything you publish. I am excited about your new endeavors to create a new paradigm in education. But I cannot get over the fact that I am discouraged by what I see around me and the profound lack of interest of people to be educated or to educate themselves. Most seem to be looking for entertainment.
(Continued). Most seem to be looking for entertainment and not to be educated. I trust that you know a better way to convert these people than I do.
I can't tell you how to problem solve people I don't know. People are individuals and have to be reached as individuals.
But I know that writing them off dehumanizes them before that interaction can take place.
Focus on one person. Don't seek to convert. Just offer what you can, speak plainly, share humor, and extoll self sovereignty.
Maybe we need to lead with ethics or an ethical worldview primarily, and then bring along epistemology (or maybe an ethics of epistemology) as an outgrowth.
Maybe incitement of fear, plays on emotion, manipulation of natural impulses (base or noble), dishonest and manipulative language and behavior and the like can be unmasked from an ethical framework first (coupled maybe with some analysis/critique/exposure/explanation and training in spotting the techniques), allowing room for--and even elevation of--humility and rational conversation afterwards.
If a person interacts happily and frictionless with 99 people who believe and understand X, that person is likely to scoff and dismiss someone who understands Y. Despite that, Y people should persist is they know the X's are being played.
We should all be revisiting our assumptions of history."
https://www.garynorth.com/conspiracyinphiladelphia.pdf
Dealing with the suffocation of our enslavement takes up so much of our bandwidth that I find it unlikely we make the choice to explore epistemology unless it’s incentivised by an immediate reward of relief from said enslavement. Education is key. This is why I find Meta Prep so darn exciting.