3 ms·

I'm not joking at all. I realize it sounds crazy and conspiratorial, but like I said, if you watch sources like Jimmy Dore over a period of months, it starts t

I'm not joking at all. I realize it sounds crazy and conspiratorial, but like I said, if you watch sources like Jimmy Dore over a period of months, it starts to become obvious. Jimmy Dore isn't the only one, there are lots of other great commentators such as Kyle Kulinski, Rising With The Hill's Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti (this one may be more your style, Krystal is left-leaning and comes from MSNBC and Saagar is right-leaning. They don't agree with everything but they cut through the BS pretty well). I would just say be open-minded and simply start watching one of these sources, it's good to be skeptical. You probably won't agree with them much in the beginning, but when you start seeing how things play out over months, it starts to make a lot more sense, then eventually it becomes obvious. Note: I am not a conspiracy person AT ALL! Having been captivated by Carl Sagan's Demon Haunted World over 20 years ago, I'm actually a big skeptic. Huge James Randi fan, etc. So, don't think that I'm some conspiracy hack, quite the opposite.

ciarannolan 6y ago
I've watched the Krystal and Saagar show a few times. It's pretty good, if a little too predictable. I don't own a TV or watch cable news; I get most of my news from feeds like AP or Reuters, then try to decide for myself what I think before reading some commentary/analysis. It's a little worrying to hear things like "[...], if you watch sources like Jimmy Dore over a period of months, it starts to become obvious." This is exactly how conspiracy theories and other quackery work. People get fed up with the mainstream and seek out alternative narratives about how the world _really_ works, then over time cede so much factual ground that their frame of reference becomes broken. This is exactly how people get into flat earth, 9/11 was an inside job, etc. A slightly better "alternative" might be a news org like The Intercept or a writer like Matt Taibbi. Both are highly ideological but fairly constrained by the facts.
- sixQuarks 6y ago
  OK, I see you're not just a corporate news junkie. Agree with your assessment of the Intercept / Matt Taibbi.

ciarannolan 6y ago

I've watched the Krystal and Saagar show a few times. It's pretty good, if a little too predictable. I don't own a TV or watch cable news; I get most of my news from feeds like AP or Reuters, then try to decide for myself what I think before reading some commentary/analysis. It's a little worrying to hear things like "[...], if you watch sources like Jimmy Dore over a period of months, it starts to become obvious." This is exactly how conspiracy theories and other quackery work. People get fed up with the mainstream and seek out alternative narratives about how the world _really_ works, then over time cede so much factual ground that their frame of reference becomes broken. This is exactly how people get into flat earth, 9/11 was an inside job, etc. A slightly better "alternative" might be a news org like The Intercept or a writer like Matt Taibbi. Both are highly ideological but fairly constrained by the facts.

sixQuarks 6y ago
OK, I see you're not just a corporate news junkie. Agree with your assessment of the Intercept / Matt Taibbi.