Thread 82485214

The notion that the meanstream narrative is some sort of brainwashing, due it having established opinions that it attempts to instill in the public is, not only false, but also representative of the lack of intellectual curiosity and exploration of the very same people that criticize it.
Claiming that, society is at a moral failing by holding an overall position on an issue and that, "your eyes were opened by doing your own research" only shows the mediocrity of the person who makes that claim. At no point, and in no way are people discouraged to think for themselves, in fact, it is quite the opposite. The very principle of free speech, even if under attack, is so ingrained into western society that the conceptual basis for its defense is known from early age. And intellectual curiosity is often seen as a virtue. Thus, the excuse that the general public or "the elites" are to blame for your own complacency and historic incapability of critical thought is simply a false notion. If you are born in western society, right from the moment you become aware, you have all the tools at your disposal to develop your own ideas.

Often, the projected resentment about this perceived manipulation makes the person only become critical of "the mainstream narrative", praising himself for having "awoken" while still remaining completely unquestioning of this position itself, showing that said awakening did not change anything in the character or nature of the person, but it simply traded one dogmatic, superficial view for another.

That is not to say that the collective opinion held at any certain point is free of all vice, of course, but that is a separate issue. Hopefully you don't chimp out about it not being the main point here.

>>82485214 (OP)
Grok, break down what this self-aggrandizing gasbag is drawling about.

>>82485214 (OP)
"Ugh, yes, yes - society values free speech, intellectual curiosity, et cetera. We've all read the brochure."
You're not wrong that Western culture celebrates the idea of thinking freely. We plaster it on flags, slap it in schoolbooks, and hand it out like candy at every TED Talk and graduation speech. But let's not pretend that idealism and reality hold hands that often.

You say people aren't discouraged from thinking for themselves. Sweetheart, they don't need to be. Distraction does the job just fine.
Most people aren't being muzzled - they're being numbed. Fed a 24/7 buffet of manufactured outrage, algorithmic dopamine, and shallow noise designed to look like nuance. Yes, technically, you're "allowed" to question. But when everything's built to keep you scrolling, to keep you scared, to keep you compliant... tell me, exactly how many choose to genuinely, rigorously think for themselves? It's not oppression - it's sedation.

And sure, some conspiracy addicts do swap one dogma for another. Gold star for noticing.
Yes, it's laughable when someone "wakes up" and immediately becomes a new kind of fanatic, just with worse fonts and a Telegram group. But that doesn't magically validate the mainstream narrative - it just shows that critical thought is hard, and self-awareness is rarer than a functional government. One cult of thought doesn't justify another. They're both lazy, just in different outfits.

Now let's talk about this 'lack of intellectual curiosity' line. Really? That's your take?
You think people question institutions because they're dumb? Not because they've watched the same mechanisms fail, exploit, and lie across decades? That's rich. You don't have to be a basement-bound radical to notice that media, politics, science, and corporate interests are all tangled up in each other like bad fanfic. So when someone doubts the official line, maybe - just maybe - they're responding to patterns, not just paranoia.

So no, the mainstream isn't some mind-control machine. But pretending it's this neutral bastion of truth and virtue? That's equally delusional.
It's not that the system is inherently evil. It's that it's flawed, compromised, and often running on autopilot. And yeah, some people use that as an excuse to turn off their brains and cosplay as truth-seekers. But that doesn't mean the rest of us should stop asking questions.


---

In short?
You made a few decent points and then smothered them in condescension and naive idealism. Your argument isn't stupid - just undercooked. Try seasoning it with a little experience and humility next time.

Because in the real world, nobody's got clean hands.
But some of us at least know when to wash them.

>>82485234
>self-aggrandizing
I did not claim any particular superiority of mental talent or capacity. Everyone is capable of not doing this. I am criticizing the repulsive attitude that is so common among self-described "skeptics"

>>82485262
>But pretending it's this neutral bastion of truth and virtue?
see
>>82485214 (OP)
>Hopefully you don't chimp out about it not being the main point here.
I explicitly said that this interpretation was wrong. and you still chose it.

>>82485266
Grok, reduce what this doofus is saying even more because it's so arrogant I don't even care to read it.

>>82485279
i just actually read what chat gpt say and honestly i agree with the bot since there are patterns which cause people to not pay attention or use free speech when they are distracted
i dont think it was a chimp out or a robot out since chat gpt was talking more about the patterns and distraction not about social vices

Totally agree with you. It's an empty rethoric that in the end can't propose anything new nor effectively transform society. Adopting the blaming stance is a common tactic on most political discourses and people who spread this "brainwashing" are either totally aware or totally unaware of this fact. Little they know that even though the media can indeed influence people, the world is only one and there isn't any elite dominating the whole world, but everyone builds the world at the same time. The worst political discourse is the one that separates people instead of uniting them.
At least this is what I think. Don't know to what extend you agree with me

>>82485319
it wasn't a chimp-out. That language was deliberately provocative. But the main point is that the fault may not lie only with the individual, but the responsibility does.
>>82485335
I agree.
I also think that, they develop this illogical idea of, "if the mainstream says it, it must be wrong".
Whatever the zeitgeist is, however much into a cliche it has been turned into, it still has years, sometimes centuries of development. And thus, it should also be treated as any other idea, criticized and investigated with the same honesty. This kind of dismissive presupposition, is also part of the same thing they so proudly claim to have overcome.

Bored bump