• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

I think were living 'the truman show' (media controlled reality)

Wtf do the trannies have to do with any of this? You do realize that transsexuals are us, as in some regular bluelight users? There is no need to divide us further than this hypothetical 'Truman Show' production already is. If you think ' the trannies' are the problem, congratulations, you are working for the powers that seek to divide humanity, keep us ignorant and in the dark, limit the expansion of consciousness and shove us all into a globalized blob that is easier to control and predict.

Yes there is an information war ongoing increasingly, and yes it is hard to discern the intentions behind the messages, but don't forget people on the side of truth and illumination are fighting this too, and this truth might not be the same beliefs you were raised with, and that is when you have to question yourself. Yes, question everything...especially yourself.


no vortech, i dont have a problem with trannies. you are missing the point my friend. its about how satanism has infected our society. dont get mad at me. im just a casual observer. youre absolutely right in a lot of ways and i dont wish to divide us further in any way. my message is that of unity. but i expect people to get mad at what i have to say but i don't see anybody trying to help you guys in the way that i am. most BL user are a lost cause but im not giving up on any of US.

when you understand the context its about how none of "us" our the problem. but you have to understand the spiritual context of how gender dyshporia plays into the elite goal of disruption and chaos. but when you start to recognize the larger pattern of historical figures, celebrities, politicians, being transgendered it sheds light on this agenda that is turning the world upside down.

please understand we are on the same side. i don't see anyone else trying to help you guys, so im forced to be that guy. there is an end game in all of this for us even if we dont realize it. you are my friend. please don't think i am a bigot. thats not the point. its about understanding that the people we are forced to idolize arent what they seem.

we are in a war with the elite. they wish to divide us. they wish to control us. they wish to enslave us with debt. they wish to control our minds so we play their game. they do this using duality and we are but pawns. all i ask is you be critical of the events that shape the way that we view the world.

for us to have a fighting chance, we have to wake up from the slumber we are in. because bad shit is coming. i think we can all sense that much at least.
 
How do you propose to help us against the United Nations and transexual world leaders?

I'm not forced to idolize celebrities, and I don't. Other than maybe Judge Milian of the People's Court, although I think she's had some bad cheek surgery when I just checked the spelling, so no, not her either. Dude from the White Stripes is pretty amazing, and maybe even shrieking Thom Yorke, who has to be a total asshole with a terrible voice, still talented. I don't know their gender identity stress-levels.

PS: If you want to sound less like a bigot, don't use "trannies".
 
I do apologize for my forceful tone...it was mostly fueled by an unrelated issue I was processing...but yeah I didn't exactly get your references, and the transsexual point is a sensitive for me especially after hearing so many people say they've been 'red pilled' or 'woke af' and then go on about how disgusting Caitlyn Jenner is. That's a face palm right there, and it is a systemic problem, people not knowing what is propaganda to divide us and what may actually help heal humanity. Some people are too hard set in their beliefs and some people are way too suggestible. Both are holding us back. I'm not saying Caitlyn Jenner's media exposure was a ploy by the 'agenda', or if it was good or bad for transsexuals overall to feel more secure in expressing what they feel is THEIR truth, but I hope the overall trend is towards people not feeling stifled/oppressed/discriminated against. However, the problem when people are empowered to speak their mind and act from their heart...well there's a lot of broken hearts and fucked up minds out there that end up unwittingly parroting the 'agenda' and increasing chaos and negativity.
 
However, the problem when people are empowered to speak their mind and act from their heart...well there's a lot of broken hearts and fucked up minds out there...

vortech, I hope I don't offend you with this quote, it's just that these words struck a chord in me and I wanted to acknowledge that as well as the power in your writing.
Best, CD
 
This kind of thinking requires one not just to doubt the mainstream media, but also the way peer-reviewed science is conducted...

I do believe both mainstream media and peer-reviewed science are subject to the same pitfall of being conducted by human beings. There's also the fact that we do not live in an ideal world. I believe you mentioned this in a sense already, but to me it still somehow felt more idealistic than realistic. Short read on the matter: https://www.economist.com/news/brie...elf-correcting-alarming-degree-it-not-trouble "Scientists like to think of science as self-correcting. To an alarming degree, it is not"

I do believe it to be wise for one to be critical of their critical thinking too, which is much more easier said than done. In the grand scheme of things, there's just way too much information around for the bullshit to be properly filtered. It becomes a necessity to prioritize and suddenly we are missing things of paramount importance and taking things for granted that in hindsight we shouldn't have. Then there's lack of time and resources. There are plenty of wars being fought in the (mass) media, be they of ideological, economical, political or even scientific nature. History should remind us that science too can be and has been used as a tool of coercion and oppression.

Whether mainstream media is or isn't being used to influence/control human thought process and therefore behavior doesn't change the fact that it is in the mutual interest of both governments and corporations to do so. They've attempted it using LSD decades ago or or at least experimented on a governmental level, so obviously it is something of interest. The question of the topic was centered around media though, so let's consider the amount of money being poured into advertisement and the research surrounding it and its effectiveness. If we can be influenced in our choices of products by mass media, who is to say we can't be influenced in other choices and opinions too? I wouldn't even call it a conspiracy that there are extremely intelligent minds employed at for example google trying to figure out how to influence us in a manner that has the most impact. We have all these technological innovations like search engines, smart phones and social media gathering all kinds of data about us (with which we usually consent when we use said innovations) that we as humans couldn't even tell a fraction of it if someone asked us to tell them everything about us and our behavior that we were aware of.

So my question is, assuming there is at least some unconscious aspect to our behavior that we aren't aware of but some entity out there was, how could we even tell whether we were being manipulated or not? Would it be in the best interests of this entity to tell us? We can be talking about financial, political, ideological or any kind of interest in general, personally I believe it depends entirely on whether the entity in question profits from the release of this information more than it would from withholding it. For example if a competing entity had a much better capability to use the same information for their own gain and the intention was to undermine the efforts of said entity. Propaganda, counter-propaganda, counter-counter-propaganda and so on until we have definitely reached the point of information overload and we begin more susceptible to just choosing what is the most convenient for us as long as we can justify it and these days there's so much information around that you can justify pretty much anything if you want to. If you have monetary resources that are in the scope of billions for example, you can provide justification in the form of scientific 'proof' that smoking cigarettes isn't unhealthy for example. If your word has enough authority you can provide justification in the form of 'scientific proof' that witches should be burned at the stake for their own sake.

The recurring theme seems to be, at least to me, that we rarely see what's really going on right now or just fail to act accordingly. Only in hindsight and often too late do we realize that somebody played us when we are talking about the really fundamental stuff where the use of the terms like 'media controlled reality' is justified I believe, though of course to have a proper discussion we would need a better definition of the term than a comparison to the truman show. Most of the time it's just really subtle stuff we perceive as relatively harmless like product advertisement for useless gizmo of the year yet at the same time the same platform (mass media) can be successfully employed to influence our thinking regarding what's happening in, say, Ukraine. We may be getting constantly wiser in the sense the the same tricks don't work on us forever, but I'd hazard a guess that the ones adept at playing the game are usually few steps ahead of us.

Luckily we also live in a world where shady things come to daylight from time to time too, like the global scale surveillance conducted by the intelligence agencies. I'm pretty sure that one was an absolutely preposterous idea for most. Not much changed despite it becoming public knowledge though I suppose, so I'm pretty sure every media outlet in existence could make a collective announcement along the lines of 'yes, we are trying to influence the very reality as you perceive it using modern techniques and technology on a daily basis!' and people would continue to live their lives largely the same. Besides, it's not always a bad or sinister thing either, certainly not a black and white thing. Sometimes the reality is both unavoidable and devastating and unless the way we perceive it is influenced, people might lose hope. Some disease or mental illness for example, the reality is that there is just so much we don't know that if general people really grasped that idea, we might have a lot more suffering around due to there now being no more working placebo treatments. If scientist and medical professionals didn't believe with confidence that the underlying fundamentals are solid, how would they convince anyone either?

The most important thing is the freedom to perceive reality however you want. To have that we need to respect the same freedom for others too. As long as we aren't enforcing the way we perceive the world on others or discriminating using the worldviews of others as our basis, we should have the the freedom of expressing ourselves too assuming it isn't violating human rights in general. To put it simply, nothing wrong with trying to influence or control the behavior of people through words, as long as you aren't trying to incite violent behavior (or inaction when the one trying to influence is the violent party) for example.

Speaking of which... http://www.wired.co.uk/article/open-letter-to-google-axel-springer
And here's a good one from "Ex-Google Design Ethicist" (is there actually a degree in product design ethics these days?) https://journal.thriveglobal.com/ho...ian-and-google-s-design-ethicist-56d62ef5edf3
 
Top